Place of questioning under money laundering law held to be Kolkata, with interim protection against coercive steps.

The High Court addressed whether summons under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 should be complied with in Delhi or at the Enforcement Directorate's Kolkata zonal office. It noted that the relief sought was limited to the place of questioning, that the alleged offence and cause of action were in West Bengal, the petitioner resided in Kolkata, and he was not named as an accused. The Court rejected the objection based on confidential documents being in Delhi, holding that the material could be transmitted to Kolkata for investigation. It also relied on a Supreme Court direction in connected proceedings. The petitioner was entitled to be questioned in Kolkata, with interim protection against coercive steps.

---

---

Issues: Whether the summons issued to the petitioner under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 should be complied with in Delhi or at the Enforcement Directorate's zonal office in Kolkata.

Analysis: The relief was confined to the place of questioning and did not seek quashing of the summons. The alleged offence and the cause of action were stated to arise in West Bengal, the petitioner resided in Kolkata, and the petitioner was not named as an accused. The objection that confidential documents were available only in Delhi was not accepted, since the material could be transmitted to the Kolkata office for use in the investigation. The reasoning was also supported by the Supreme Court's order directing questioning at Kolkata in proceedings arising from the same ECIR.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to be questioned at the Enforcement Directorate's zonal office in Kolkata, and interim protection against coercive steps was granted.

---