TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Dismissal of Writ Petition for Investigation into Money Laundering & Smuggling</h1> <h3>AJI KRISHNAN Versus UNION OF INDIA, PREVENTIVE COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, MR. PINARAYI VIJAYAN CHIEF MINISTER, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DIRECTOR – ENFORCEMENT, ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, SMT. SWAPNA SURESH, STATE OF KERALA</h3> AJI KRISHNAN Versus UNION OF INDIA, PREVENTIVE COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, MR. PINARAYI VIJAYAN CHIEF MINISTER, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT ... Issues Involved:1. Maintainability of the Writ Petition2. Failure to Reveal Material Facts and Petitioner's Connection with the 6th Respondent3. Objections Regarding Affidavit and Alternative Remedies4. Previous Judgments on Similar Issues5. Merits of the Allegations and Relief ClaimedSummary:1. Maintainability of the Writ Petition:The petitioner sought a direction for a fair and time-bound investigation into allegations of money laundering and illegal gold smuggling, involving high-ranking political functionaries. The respondents raised preliminary objections regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, arguing the absence of pleadings about the petitioner's credentials, unsubstantiated allegations against constitutional functionaries, and the existence of alternative remedies.2. Failure to Reveal Material Facts and Petitioner's Connection with the 6th Respondent:The petitioner did not disclose his identity or his connection with the 6th respondent, Ms. Swapna Suresh, in the writ petition. The court noted that the petitioner was allegedly the employer of Ms. Swapna Suresh and had failed to reveal this fact. Despite this, considering the public importance of the case, the court decided that the absence of pleading as to the credentials of the petitioner, by itself, need not de-suit the petitioner.3. Objections Regarding Affidavit and Alternative Remedies:The respondents argued that the affidavit and documents filed by the petitioner were imperfect and that alternative remedies were available. The court held that these objections were not sustainable in the peculiar circumstances of this case, emphasizing that the court cannot shut its doors to documents that can throw light on allegations of impairment of public probity.4. Previous Judgments on Similar Issues:The court referenced two previous judgments where similar writ petitions seeking directions for criminal investigations against the Chief Minister of Kerala were dismissed. The court noted that the present writ petition sought practically the same relief as those earlier petitions, and entertaining this petition would lead to a plurality of litigations, potentially derailing the administration of justice.5. Merits of the Allegations and Relief Claimed:The court found that the Customs and Enforcement Directorate had already conducted investigations and filed complaints based on the materials collected. There were no exceptional circumstances or materials produced by the petitioner to warrant a further investigation. The court also noted that ongoing investigations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and other relevant laws were being conducted properly. Therefore, the relief of a fair and just investigation and monitoring of the investigation could not arise.Conclusion:The court dismissed the writ petition, concluding that the preliminary objections raised by the respondents had merit and that the petitioner's apprehensions regarding the non-conduct of a fair investigation were without basis. The court emphasized that the law applies equally to all, irrespective of status or position.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
