TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1240
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner which resulted in a crime being registered in Crime No.64/2015 against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(e) & 13(2) read with Section 120B of the IPC. The police after investigation filed a 'B' report before the concerned court. The concerned court in terms of its order dated 20.04.2021 after hearing the complainant accepts the 'B' report and closes the proceedings against the petitioner. 4. It is thereafter the present notice emerges from respondent no.2-Enforcement Directorate. It is this notice that drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the 'B' report has been filed in favour of the petitioner by the investigating agency and the concerned court has after hearing the complainant accepted the 'B' report and closed the proceedings. Therefore, it forms the closure of the proceedings in the predicate offence. Once that having been closed, learned Counsel would submit that the Enforcement Directorate would not get a right to initiate proceedings and issue summons to the petitioner. He would seek quashment of the proceedings initiated by the Enforcement D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt in the case of Rojer Mathew. (ii) The expression "proceedings" occurring in Clause (na) of Section 2(1) of the 2002 Act is contextual and is required to be given expansive meaning to include inquiry procedure followed by the Authorities of ED, the Adjudicating Authority, and the Special Court. (iii) The expression "investigation" in Clause (na) of Section 2(1) of the 2002 Act does not limit itself to the matter of investigation concerning the offence under the Act and is interchangeable with the function of "inquiry" to be undertaken by the Authorities under the Act. (iv) The Explanation inserted to Clause (u) of Section 2(1) of the 2002 Act does not travel beyond the main provision predicating tracking and reaching upto the property derived or obtained directly or indirectly as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. (v)(a) Section 3 of the 2002 Act has a wider reach and captures every process and activity, direct or indirect, in dealing with the proceeds of crime and is not limited to the happening of the final act of integration of tainted property in the formal economy. The Explanation inserted to Section 3 by way ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the meaning assigned to it hereinabove. (viii) The challenge to deletion of proviso to subsection (1) of Section 17 of the 2002 Act stands rejected. There are stringent safeguards provided in Section 17 and Rules framed thereunder. Moreover, the pre-condition in the proviso to Rule 3(2) of the 2005 Rules cannot be read into Section 17 after its amendment. The Central Government may take necessary corrective steps to obviate confusion caused in that regard. (ix) The challenge to deletion of proviso to subsection (1) of Section 18 of the 2002 Act also stands rejected. There are similar safeguards provided in Section 18. We hold that the amended provision does not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness. (x) The challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 19 of the 2002 Act is also rejected. There are stringent safeguards provided in Section 19. The provision does not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness. (xi) Section 24 of the 2002 Act has reasonable nexus with the purposes and objects sought to be achieved by the 2002 Act and cannot be regarded as manifestly arbitrary or unconstitutional. (xii)(a) The proviso in Clause (a) of sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re not hit by Article 20(3) or Article 21 of the Constitution of India. (xvi) Section 63 of the 2002 Act providing for punishment regarding false information or failure to give information does not suffer from any vice of arbitrariness. (xvii) The inclusion or exclusion of any particular offence in the Schedule to the 2002 Act is a matter of legislative policy; and the nature or class of any predicate offence has no bearing on the validity of the Schedule or any prescription thereunder. (xviii)(a) In view of special mechanism envisaged by the 2002 Act, ECIR cannot be equated with an FIR under the 1973 Code. ECIR is an internal document of the ED and the fact that FIR in respect of scheduled offence has not been recorded does not come in the way of the Authorities referred to in Section 48 to commence inquiry/investigation for initiating "civil action" of "provisional attachment" of property being proceeds of crime. (b) Supply of a copy of ECIR in every case to the person concerned is not mandatory, it is enough if ED at the time of arrest, discloses the grounds of such arrest. (c) However, when the arrested person is produced before the ....