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>ED loses arrest powers after Special Court takes cognizance under Section 19 PMLA, bonds allowed under Section 88 CrPC</h1> <h3>TARSEM LAL Versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT JALANDHAR ZONAL OFFICE</h3> TARSEM LAL Versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT JALANDHAR ZONAL OFFICE - (2024) 7 SCC 61 Issues Involved:1. Applicability of Sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC to complaints under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA.2. Issuance of summons or warrants by the Special Court.3. Whether an accused appearing pursuant to a summons is deemed to be in custody.4. Applicability of Section 88 of the CrPC to PMLA complaints.5. Conditions under which the ED can seek custody of the accused after cognizance is taken.6. Practice of taking accused into custody after appearing in compliance with summons.7. Procedure for cancellation of warrants.Summary:1. Applicability of Sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC to complaints under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA:The Supreme Court held that once a complaint under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA is filed, it will be governed by Sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC as none of these provisions are inconsistent with the PMLA. The Special Court must apply its mind to whether a prima facie case of an offence under Section 3 of the PMLA is made out, and if so, can take recourse to Section 204 of the CrPC to issue process.2. Issuance of summons or warrants by the Special Court:The Court held that if the accused was not arrested by the ED till the filing of the complaint, the Court should issue a summons to the accused and not a warrant. Even if the accused is on bail, a summons must be issued. The Court emphasized that the issuance of summons is the rule unless the accused is charged with a heinous crime and is likely to tamper with evidence or evade the process of law.3. Whether an accused appearing pursuant to a summons is deemed to be in custody:The Court rejected the argument that an accused appearing pursuant to a summons is deemed to be in custody. It clarified that the object of issuing a summons is to secure the accused's presence before the Court, not to take him into custody. Therefore, it is not necessary for the accused to apply for bail upon appearing in response to a summons.4. Applicability of Section 88 of the CrPC to PMLA complaints:Section 88 of the CrPC, which allows the Court to take bonds for appearance, applies to complaints under the PMLA as it is not inconsistent with the PMLA. The Court held that if an accused appears pursuant to a summons and offers to submit bonds in terms of Section 88, the Special Court should accept the bonds to ensure the accused's appearance during the trial.5. Conditions under which the ED can seek custody of the accused after cognizance is taken:After cognizance of the complaint under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA is taken, the ED and other authorities named in Section 19 cannot exercise the power of arrest of the accused shown in the complaint. If the ED wants custody of the accused for further investigation, it must seek custody by applying to the Special Court, which must pass an order after hearing the accused and recording brief reasons.6. Practice of taking accused into custody after appearing in compliance with summons:The Court noted that some Special Courts under the PMLA follow the practice of taking the accused into custody after they appear pursuant to a summons. The Court declared this practice illegal and emphasized that such a practice may offend the right to liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.7. Procedure for cancellation of warrants:The Court held that if an accused does not appear after a summons is served, the Special Court can issue a warrant under Section 70 of the CrPC. The accused can apply for cancellation of the warrant by giving an undertaking to appear regularly before the Court. The Special Court can cancel the warrant without insisting on taking the accused into custody, provided an undertaking is furnished by the accused to appear regularly.Operative Conclusions:a) The complaint under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA will be governed by Sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC.b) Summons should be issued as a normal rule if the accused was not arrested till the filing of the complaint.c) An accused appearing pursuant to a summons is not deemed to be in custody.d) The Special Court can grant exemption from personal appearance under Section 205 of the CrPC.e) The Special Court can issue a warrant if the accused does not appear after a summons is served.f) An order accepting bonds under Section 88 does not amount to a grant of bail.g) The Special Court has the power to issue a warrant if the accused fails to appear after furnishing bonds under Section 88.h) Section 88 is discretionary and not mandatory in every case.i) The ED cannot arrest an accused named in the complaint after cognizance is taken.j) The ED must seek custody of the accused by applying to the Special Court if further investigation is needed.The appeals were allowed, and the warrants against the appellants were cancelled subject to conditions of filing undertakings and furnishing bonds within one month.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
