2024 (6) TMI 774

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (e) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in Crime No. 54/2012. 2. Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri. Sandesh J. Chouta, for Smt. Maneesha Kongovi, appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel Sri. Madhukar Deshpande, appearing for respondent No. 1. 3. The wife had filed a discharge before the concerned Court, which had been rejected. The wife then knocks at the doors of the revisional jurisdiction of a Court in Crl. R.P. No. 814/2015, which comes to be allowed by an order dated 24.02.2016, quashing the proceedings against the wife, which has become final. Therefore, the wife has been absolved of all the blame that was made while registering crime in Crime No. 54/2012. 4. Insofar as the present petitioner, the husband is concerned, the proceedings were challenged before this Court in W.P. No. 736/2018. This Court in terms of its order dated 08.02.2023, quashed the proceedings against the petitioners. The lokayuktha Police had tossed the said order before the Apex Court in S.L.P. No. 11870/2023. The Apex Court on 15.09.2023, while issuing notice had passed the following order: "Delay condoned. Application for exemp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CC Online SC 929 has held as follows: "467. In light of the above analysis, we now proceed to summarise our conclusion on seminal points in issue in the following terms:- (i) The question as to whether some of the amendments to the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 could not have been enacted by the Parliament by way of a Finance Act has not been examined in this judgment. The same is left open for being examined along with or after the decision of the Larger Bench (seven Judges) of this Court in the case of Rojer Mathew 705. (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 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is constitutionally valid. It provides for a balancing arrangement to secure the interests of the person as also ensures that the proceeds of crime remain available to be dealt with in the manner provided by the 2002 Act. The procedural safeguards as delineated by us hereinabove are effective measures to protect the interests of person concerned. (vii) The challenge to the validity of subsection (4) of Section 8 of the 2002 Act is also rejected subject to Section 8 being invoked and operated in accordance with the meaning assigned to it hereinabove. (viii) The challenge to deletion of proviso to sub-section (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 sub-section (1) of Section 18 of the 2002 Act also stands rejected. There are similar safeguards provided in Section 18. We hold that the amended pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eneficial provision of Section 436A of the 1973 Code could be invoked by the accused arrested for offence punishable under the 2002 Act. (xv)(a) The process envisaged by Section 50 of the 2002 Act is in the nature of an inquiry against the proceeds of crime and is not "investigation" in strict sense of the term for initiating prosecution; and the Authorities under the 2002 Act (referred to in Section 48), are not police officers as such. (b) The statements recorded by the Authorities under the 2002 Act are 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....