HC examined a criminal revision challenging cognizance and...

HC examined a criminal revision challenging cognizance and maintainability of a Second Supplementary Prosecution Complaint under PMLA arising from an alleged money-laundering conspiracy involving shell entities and defrauding public sector banks. HC held that cognizance is taken of the offence, not the offender, and once cognizance was taken on 25.11.2022, subsequent supplementary complaints under Explanation (ii) to Section 44 PMLA flow from the original complaint and do not require fresh cognizance. The SFIO complaint dated 09.09.2022 was held to be fresh material, not stale or a mere re-evaluation, and the ratio in Mariam Fashuddin was distinguished. HC further held that pre-cognizance hearing is limited to jurisdictional and procedural scrutiny, not a mini-trial. Finding no illegality in the Special Court's order, HC dismissed the criminal revision and directed the trial to proceed on merits, uninfluenced by its factual observations.