TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....002) whereby and whereunder, the application filed by the petitioner seeking discharge has been rejected. 4. Criminal Revision No.1326 of 2018 is directed against the order dated 13.06.2018 in connection with ECIR/02/PAT/09/AD registered for the offence under section 4 of the PMLA, 2002 whereby and whereunder, the charge has been framed against the petitioners with respect to Supplementary Complaint. Factual Matrix: 5. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the instant petition which requires to be enumerated herein, read as under: (i) The Petitioner filed the Cr. Rev. 1091 of 2012 challenging the Order dated 25.09.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI cum PMLA at Ranchi in the petitioner's application for discharge filed under section 227 of the Cr. P. C. against the Complaint dated 06.10.2010 filed by the Opposite Party against the Petitioner under section 45 of the PMLA, 2002. (ii) The petitioners filed Cr. Rev. No.1326 of 2018 challenging the Order dated 13.06.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI cum PMLA at Ranchi whereby charges have been framed against the petitioners with respect to Supplementary Complaint. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the offence of money laundering under the provisions of the PMLA 2002; (viii) It is pleaded that the Enforcement Directorate regularly carried out investigations with the Petitioner from the period October 2009 to August 2010 including personal appearance before the Enforcement Directorate, recording of statements, submission of various records etc. The Petitioner rendered full co-operation to the Enforcement Directorate and the Petitioner was arrested on 11.08.2010; (ix) It is pleaded that thereafter on 06.10.2010 the Enforcement Directorate filed a Complaint in respect of the Petitioner u/s 45 of the PMLA 2002 bearing number ECIR/02/PAT/09/AD (Suppl.) dated 06.10.2010. At such time the Enforcement Directorate held that, further investigation in the case was continuing. (x) The Petitioner has not been charged with any Scheduled Offences and has been charged with the allegation of offence u/s 3 of PMLA 2002 and which in the event of conviction is punishable u/s 4 of the said Act. (xi) It is pleaded that the petitioner was sent to S.L. Raheja Hospital, Mumbai for better treatment for nuero surgical complications under custody as per the orders o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 07.06.2018 and consequent to dismissal of the said application charges have been framed against the petitioners vide order dated 13.06.2018 under Section 3 of PML Act 2002 punishable under Section 4 of the PML Act 2002. 11. Being aggrieved with the order dated 13.06.2018 the revision application being Cr. Revision 1326 of 2018 has been filed for revision of the impugned order dated 13.06.2018. 12. It needs to mention herein that the petitioner has earlier moved before this Hon'ble Court for quashing of warrant of arrest issued by the learned Trial Court in for writ petition vide W.P. (Cr.) No.10/2010 and the said application was dismissed vide order dated 3.2.2010 by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 13. Thereafter, the petitioner has moved against the order dated 03.02.2010 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 1779/2010 and the said SLP was directed to be withdrawn with liberty to move an application for regular bail before the appropriate Court. 14. Thereafter, the petitioner has moved for grant of regular bail before learned 1st A.J.C. Cum Special Judge under PMLA and the same has been rejected vide the order dated 06.10.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded that the framing of charges is a procedure of criminal law but subject to appropriate and reasoned disposal of any discharge pending prior to it with recording of proper submissions and meritorious hearing. (v) It has been contended that framing of the charges on the same i.e. on 25.09.20212, and the rejection of the discharge application on that very day without any opportunity to know the reasons for the rejection of the Discharge Application is untenable in the eyes of law. (vi) It has been that after seven years of filing of the supplementary complaint dated 6.10.10 against Manoj Kumar Babulal Punamia and after six years an amalgamation order dated 9.2.12 where the investigation against the accused/revisionist Manoj Kumar Babulal Punamia was completed and charges be framed, the supplementary complaint has been filed after lapse of six years when the amalgamation application was positively adjudicated vide order dated 12.4.12. (vii) It has been contended that petitioners never received or handled with the proceeds of crime directly or indirectly relating to the schedule offence and, therefore, it is not possible to sustain the supplementary complai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ders calling for any interference in revisional jurisdiction of this Court. The learned trial Court has passed a well-reasoned order refusing to discharge the petitioner. (iii) It has been contended that the present petition is not maintainable as Directorate of Enforcement has filed Prosecution Complaint and several Supplementary Prosecution Complaint in the matter elaborating the close nexus of Manoj Babulal Punamia, Arvind Vyas, Anil Bastawade with Binod Sinha and Madhu Koda. Various steps of Money Laundering and involvement of various persons like Manoj Babulal Punamia, Arvind Vyas, Anil Bastawade, Vijay Joshi at various steps of laundering of corrupt money earned by Madhu Koda by misusing his position. Properties involved in Proceeds of Crime were identified and attached as per PML Act, 2002. Prosecution was launched in Trial Court and always at the time of filing Prosecution Complaint or Supplementary Prosecution Complaint, the Prosecution craved leave to file Supplementary Prosecution Complaint. (iv) It has been contended that there is a clear nexus of Madhu Koda with Manoj Babulal Punamia present revisionist through Binod Kumar Sinha. Supplementary Prosecu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d through various channels and after going through various points, it is projected as untainted. (ix) It has been contended that during the investigation, it was found that illegally acquired money of Madhu Koda through its partner went through many inter-related transactions, was used in acquiring many companies, was used in purchase and sale of shares of various companies, and documentary evidences as well as statements of various persons clearly shows that Proceeds of Crime laundered by Manoj Babulal Punamia with the help of Binod Sinha and other associates of Madhu Koda to the tune of Rs. 138.18 Crore. (x) It has been contended that so far as sections 23 and 24 of PMLA are concerned, these sections put the onus on petitioner to prove that proceed of crime is not involved in money-laundering. Any inter-connected transaction relating to proceeds of crime will be considered as money-laundering. The Special Court had issued summon to petitioner after taking cognizance of the supplementary complaint filed by the Directorate of Enforcement and accorded an opportunity to the petitioner to be heard and to show if proceeds of crime possessed by the petitioner at the ti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of Arvind Vyas on 31.10.09 which was allegedly brought by Arvind Vyas for Manoj Punamia. The seized papers showed the payment of Rs. 25 crores out of the total cost of US 60 million dollars and that Anil Adinath Bastawade had sent those papers from Dubai for Babulal Punamia. 26. It was also alleged that Camptech Manufacturing Co. was a company registered at Dubai and shares of the company were held by Sanjay Chudhary, Dhananjay Choudhary, Anil Adinath Bastawade, Manoj Punamia and one local person of Dubai. It was further alleged that the petitioners were managing the illegal money of Binod Sinha in Jumerra village Down Town Jabel Ali Project, Dubai and handled Binod Sinha's fund in coal mines in Indonesia. 27. Further on perusal of the record reveals that vide court order dated 25.9.12 the discharge application filed by the petitioner was dismissed and accordingly charges were framed. Thereafter on 14.02.2018 supplementary prosecution complaint has been filed against the petitioners and against the aforesaid complaint the discharge application has been filed by the petitioners which has been dismissed on 07.06.2013 and consequent to dismissal of the said application vide o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence;]" 35. It is evident from the aforesaid provision that "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad. 36. In the explanation it has been referred that for removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence. The aforesaid explanation has been inserted in the statute book by way of Act 23 of 2019. 37. It is, thus, evident that the reason for giving explanation under Section 2(1)(u) is by way of clarification to the effect t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely:- (a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.]" 42. It is evident from the aforesaid provision that "offence of money-laundering" means whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming it as untai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the scheduled offence" will come under the fold of the proceeds of crime. 48. In the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra) as under paragraph 284, it has been held that the Authority under the 2002 Act, is to prosecute a person for offence of money-laundering only if it has reason to believe, which is required to be recorded in writing that the person is in possession of "proceeds of crime". Only if that belief is further supported by tangible and credible evidence indicative of involvement of the person concerned in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, action under the Act can be taken forward for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of crime and until vesting thereof in the Central Government, such process initiated would be a standalone process. 49. Now, after having discussed the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on the issue of various provisions of the Act, 2002, this Court, is proceeding to discuss the principle of discharge and framing of charge. 50. Now, after having discussed the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on the issue of various....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Anti-Corruption v. N. Suresh Rajan, (2014) 11 SCC 709, wherein at paragraphs no. 29, 32.4, 33 and 34 the Hon'ble Apex Court has been observed as under:- "29. We have bestowed our consideration to the rival submissions and the submissions made by Mr. Ranjit Kumar commend us. True it is that at the time of consideration of the applications for discharge, the court cannot act as a mouthpiece of the prosecution or act as a post office and may sift evidence in order to find out whether or not the allegations made are groundless so as to pass an order of discharge. It is trite that at the stage of consideration of an application for discharge, the court has to proceed with an assumption that the materials brought on record by the prosecution are true and evaluate the said materials and documents with a view to find out whether the facts emerging therefrom taken at their face value disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offence. At this stage, probative value of the materials has to be gone into and the court is not expected to go deep into the matter and hold that the materials would not warrant a conviction. In our opinion, what needs to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h is akin to Section 239 CrPC pertaining to warrant cases) has the undoubted power to sift and weigh the evidence for the limited purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case against the accused has been made out; where the material placed before the court discloses grave suspicion against the accused which has not been properly explained, the court will be fully justified in framing the charge; by and large if two views are possible and one of them giving rise to suspicion only, as distinguished from grave suspicion against the accused, the trial Judge will be justified in discharging him. It is thus clear that while examining the discharge application filed under Section 227 CrPC, it is expected from the trial Judge to exercise its judicial mind to determine as to whether a case for trial has been made out or not. It is true that in such proceedings, the court is not supposed to hold a mini trial by marshalling the evidence on record." 56. It is further settled position of law that defence on merit is not to be considered at the time of stage of framing of charge and that cannot be a ground of discharge. A reference may be made to the judgment as rendered by the Ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this jurisdiction have found expression in several decisions of this Court. It is a settled principle of law that at the stage of considering an application for discharge the court must proceed on the assumption that the material which has been brought on the record by the prosecution is true and evaluate the material in order to determine whether the facts emerging from the material, taken on its face value, disclose the existence of the ingredients necessary to constitute the offence. In State of T.N. v. N. Suresh Rajan [State of T.N. v. N. Suresh Rajan, (2014) 11 SCC 709 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 529 : (2014) 2 SCC (L&S) 721], adverting to the earlier decisions on the subject, this Court held : (SCC pp. 721-22, para 29) '29. ... At this stage, probative value of the materials has to be gone into and the court is not expected to go deep into the matter and hold that the materials would not warrant a conviction. In our opinion, what needs to be considered is whether there is a ground for presuming that the offence has been committed and not whether a ground for convicting the accused has been made out. To put it differently, if the court thinks that the accused might have comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Palwinder Singh v. Balvinder Singh, (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 850 has been pleased to hold that charges can also be framed on the basis of strong suspicion. Marshaling and appreciation of the evidence is not in the domain of the court at that point of time. 59. Further it is pertinent to mention here that power to discharge an accused was designed to prevent harassment to an innocent person by the arduous trial or the ordeal of prosecution. How that intention is to be achieved is reasonably clear in the section itself. The power has been entrusted to the Sessions Judge who brings to bear his knowledge and experience in criminal trials. Besides, he has the assistance of counsel for the accused and Public Prosecutor. He is required to hear both sides before framing any charge against the accused or for discharging him. If the Sessions Judge after hearing the parties frames a charge and also makes an order in support thereof, the law must be allowed to take its own course. Self-restraint on the part of the High Court should be the rule unless there is a glaring injustice which stares the court in the face. The opinion on any matter may differ depending upon the person who views it. Ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....extend its jurisdiction to quash the charge in haste. A Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa (1996) 4 SCC 659 referred to the meaning of the word "presume" while relying upon Black's Law Dictionary. It was defined to mean "to believe or accept upon probable evidence"; "to take as proved until evidence to the contrary is forthcoming". In other words, the truth of the matter has to come out when the prosecution evidence is led, the witnesses are cross-examined by the defence, the incriminating material and evidence is put to the accused in terms of Section 313 of the Code and then the accused is provided an opportunity to lead defence, if any. It is only upon completion of such steps that the trial concludes with the court forming its final opinion and delivering its judgment. Merely because there was a civil transaction between the parties would not by itself alter the status of the allegations constituting the criminal offence. 61. Thus, it is evident that the law regarding the approach to be adopted by the Court while considering an application for discharge of the accused person the Court has to form a definite opinion, upon consideration of the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... framing a charge the court must apply its judicial mind on the material placed on record and must be satisfied that the commission of offence by the accused was possible. (vi) At the stage of Sections 227 and 228, the court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record with a view to find out if the facts emerging therefrom taken at their face value disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offence. For this limited purpose, sift the evidence as it cannot be expected even at that initial stage to accept all that the prosecution states as gospel truth even if it is opposed to common sense or the broad probabilities of the case. (vii) If two views are possible and one of them gives rise to suspicion only, as distinguished from grave suspicion, the trial Judge will be empowered to discharge the accused and at this stage, he is not to see whether the trial will end in conviction or acquittal." 63. In the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of M.E. Shivalingamurthy v. CBI, reported in (2020) 2 SCC 768, the above principles have been reiterated in para 17, 18, 28 to 31 and the Hon'ble supreme c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cused to produce any document at the stage of framing of the charge. At the stage of framing of the charge, the submission of the accused is to be confined to the material produced by the police (see State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi). 28. It is here that again it becomes necessary that we remind ourselves of the contours of the jurisdiction under Section 227 CrPC. The principle established is to take the materials produced by the prosecution, both in the form of oral statements and also documentary material, and act upon it without it been subjected to questioning through cross-examination and everything assumed in favour of the prosecution, if a scenario emerges where no offence, as alleged, is made out against the accused, it, undoubtedly, would ensure to the benefit of the accused warranting the trial court to discharge the accused. 29. It is not open to the accused to rely on the material by way of defence and persuade the court to discharge him. 30. However, what is the meaning of the expression "materials on the basis of which grave suspicion is aroused in the mind of the court's", which is not explained away? Can the accused explain away ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld be the material which is produced and relied upon by the prosecution. The sifting of such material is not to be so meticulous as would render the exercise a mini trial to find out the guilt or otherwise of the accused. All that is required at this stage is that the court must be satisfied that the evidence collected by the prosecution is sufficient to presume that the accused has committed an offence. Even a strong suspicion would suffice. Undoubtedly, apart from the material that is placed before the court by the prosecution in the shape of final report in terms of Section 173 CrPC, the court may also rely upon any other evidence or material which is of sterling quality and has direct bearing on the charge laid before it by the prosecution." 66. Thus, from aforesaid legal propositions it can be safely inferred that if, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for doing so and if, after such consideration an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 by the court concerned by taking into consideration the entire material available on record. 72. The learned counsel for the petitioner has emphatically contended that while rejecting the discharge application, rule of natural Justice has not been adhered by the Spl. Judge PML Act, therefore the order dated 25.09.2012 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 73. This Court in order to appreciate the aforesaid contention has gone through the order dated 25.09.2012 by which the application for discharge of the petitioner has been rejected. 74. It is evident from the aforesaid order that the case was fixed for charge on 13.10.11 and therefore ample time was available to the accused persons including the revisionist for filing or for taking any step but the petitioner/revisionist did not file application for discharge, thereafter on 13.9.12 i.e. almost after one year, it had been ordered by the Court concerned that every petition filed for discharge shall be deemed to be rejected. Accordingly, the Spl. Judge PML Act while taking into entire material available on record has dismissed the said discharge application on the ground of delaying tactics which had been adopted by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 3 of the PML Act 2002 against the petitioners vide order dated 13.06.2018. 79. It needs to refer herein that in the present criminal Revision application (Cr. Revision No. 1326 of 2018) the order framing charge dated 13.06.2018 has been challenged, wherein it has been mention about the culpability of the petitioners. It has been stated therein that the petitioners along with the other accused persons during the period from 2005 to 2008 have knowingly assisted and have been a party in the process and activities connected with the proceed of crime and projected it as untainted property by obtaining/acquiring huge properties and also by showing transaction through paper companies and by obtaining accommodation entries in such paper companies for the purpose of projecting the proceeds of crime as untainted properties and knowingly have obtained/acquired huge properties at different states of India and across the border in Foreign countries such as Dubai, Sweden, Indonesia, Thailand and Liberia, you all have directly or indirectly indulged and knowingly assisted each other and by involving in process and activity connected with the proceeds of crime of schedule offence of Preve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y himself or his associates or group of companies which is owned/controlled by him. 83. Thus, from the aforesaid it is evident that prima facie-material is available against the present petitioners, as such charges have been framed under the Section 3 of the Act 2002. 84. Further it needs to refer herein that supplementary prosecution complaint has been filed on 14.02.2018 but there is no bar in the filing of the supplementary complaint as per the criminal procedure Code and further as per the mandate of Section 216 Cr. P.C. the charge can be added or alter at any stage but before pronouncement of the judgment. 85. Further it needs to refer herein that co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Directorate of Enforcement V/s Narendra Mohan Singh and Ankita Singh, 2014 (3) JLJR 260 in para-16 and 17 it has been observed that the "provisions as contained in Section 44 (1)(b) and 45 of the PML Act, refers to 'a complaint'. Even if such reference is there of 'a complaint', it never prevents the department from filing of supplementary complaint inasmuch as the reference of the complaint has been made in those provisions in the context that whenever a complaint filed by an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onstitute any property as proceeds of crime, it must be derived or obtained directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The explanation clarifies that the proceeds of crime include property, not only derived or obtained from scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence. Clause (u) also clarifies that even the value of any such property will also be the proceeds of crime. 91. It has further been observed by referring the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.(supra) that the condition precedent for the existence of proceeds of crime is the existence of a scheduled offence. At paragraph-15 the finding has been given therein that on plain reading of Section 3 of the Act, 2002, an offence under Section 3 can be committed after a scheduled offence is committed. By giving an example, it has been clarified that if a person who is unconnected with the scheduled offence, knowingly assists the concealment of the proceeds of crime or know....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f India, (2023) 12 SCC 1], SCC p. 182) "134. From the bare language of Section 3 of the 2002 Act, it is amply clear that the offence of money laundering is an independent offence regarding the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime which had been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to or in relation to a scheduled offence. The process or activity can be in any form - be it one of concealment, possession, acquisition, use of proceeds of crime as much as projecting it as untainted property or claiming it to be so. Thus, involvement in any one of such process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime would constitute offence of money laundering. This offence otherwise has nothing to do with the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence - except the proceeds of crime derived or obtained as a result of that crime. 135. Needless to mention that such process or activity can be indulged in only after the property is derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity (a scheduled offence). It would be an offence of money-laundering to indulge in or to assist or being party to the process or activity connected wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fence for concealing the proceeds of the crime of extortion can be guilty of the offence of money-laundering. Therefore, it is not necessary that a person against whom the offence under Section 3 PMLA is alleged must have been shown as the accused in the scheduled offence. What is held in para 135 of the decision of this Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, (2023) 12 SCC 1] supports the above conclusion. The conditions precedent for attracting the offence under Section 3 PMLA are that there must be a scheduled offence and that there must be proceeds of crime in relation to the scheduled offence as defined in clause (u) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 PMLA.. 92. Be it noted that the legal presumption under Section 24(a) of the Act 2002, would apply when the person is charged with the offence of money-laundering and his direct or indirect involvement in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, is established. The existence of proceeds of crime is, therefore, a foundational fact, to be established by the prosecution, including the involvement of the person in any process or activity connected therewith. Once these foundational facts are establis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and to curb the use of proceeds of crime in the formal economy. Given the evolving complexity of financial crimes, courts must adopt a strict approach in matters concerning economic offences to ensure that perpetrators do not exploit procedural loopholes to evade justice. 33. The present case involves grave and serious allegations of financial misconduct, misuse of position, and involvement in transactions constituting money laundering. The appellant seeks an end to the proceedings at a preliminary stage, effectively preventing the full adjudication of facts and evidence before the competent forum. However, as established in multiple judicial pronouncements, cases involving economic offences necessitate a thorough trial to unearth the complete chain of events, financial transactions, and culpability of the accused. 34. The material submitted by the respondent, coupled with the broad legislative framework of the PMLA, indicates the necessity of allowing the trial to proceed and not discharging the appellant at the nascent stage of charge framing. The argument that the proceedings are unwarranted is devoid of substance in light of the statutory objectives, the cont....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of State of Tamil Nadu v. R. Soundirarasu, (supra) has held in paragraph 81 to 83 as under: 81. The High Court has acted completely beyond the settled parameters, as discussed above, which govern the power to discharge the accused from the prosecution. The High Court could be said to have donned the role of a chartered accountant. This is exactly what this Court observed in Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi [CBI v. Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi, (2021) 18 SCC 135]. The High Court has completely ignored that it was not at the stage of trial or considering an appeal against a verdict in a trial. The High Court has enquired into the materials produced by the accused persons, compared with the information compiled by the investigating agency and pronounced a verdict saying that the explanation offered by the accused persons deserves to be accepted applying the doctrine of preponderance of probability. This entire exercise has been justified on account of the investigating officer not taking into consideration the explanation offered by the public servant and also not taking into consideration the lawful acquired assets of the wife of the public servant i.e. Respondent 2 here....