TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Constitution of India read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the Code') for amending the prayer in the main writ application along with amendment in synopsis. 02. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that prior to approaching this Court, the petitioner had invoked the jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing writ W.P. (Crl.) 411 of 2025, wherein the petitioner, inter alia, sought a declaration that Section 50 and Section 63 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 are ultra vires to the Constitution of India and further for quashing of statements recorded and summons issued by the respondent/ED under the said impugned provisions. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, after considering the submissions of the petitioner, was pleased to pass an order dated 17.10.2025, whereby the said writ petition was disposed of, with liberty to raise all contentions before the appropriate forum, i.e., before this High Court. In pursuance to the liberty given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide Order dated 17.10.2025, the petitioner filed the present writ petition before this Court, seeking the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll the statements of Petitioner dated 16.07.2024, 18.07.2024, 18.09.2024, 20.09.2024, 21.09.2024 and 01.10.2024 recorded by the Respondent/ED as being violative of Article 20 of the Constitution of India. VI. "Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, thereby quashing the summons dated 09.09.2025, 15.09.2025 issued to the Petitioner by Respondent no. 2/ ED in ECIR/PTZO/13/2025 being violative of Article of 14 of Constitution of India. "The inadvertent mention of writ application under Article 32 in the synopsis portion be also allowed to be corrected as writ application under Article 226 of the constitution of India and the same may be read accordingly." Mr. Rohatgi, lastly, submitted that all amendments which are just and proper and are not mala fide, are to be liberally allowed following the settled law under Order 6 Rule 17 of the code and merit of the amendment are not to be looked into at the stage of allowing the amendment. Thus, learned senior counsel submitted that the present interlocutory application be allowed and the petitioner may be allowed to incorporate the amendments in the main writ petition. 03. Mr. Zohai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paragraph-4 held as under: "4. Having said that the Court is constrained to observe that despite the Three-Judge Bench decision in the case of "Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Others vs. Union of India and Others" (2022 SCC Online SC 929), upholding the vires of various provisions including Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA, a new trend is developed in this Court to file writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India again challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 50, 63 and other provisions of the PMLA, also seeking consequential reliefs which otherwise would tantamount to by-passing the other alternative efficacious forums available to the petitioners under the law." 04. Mr. Hossain next referred to the decision in the case of Y Balaji Vs. Karthik Desari & Anr. (SLP (Crl) 12779-12781/2022, decided on 16.05.2023) and quoted paragraph-116, which reads as under: "116. First of all, we should point out that a notice ordered in the review petition being Review Petition (Crl.) No. 219 of 2022, will not destroy or diminish the precedential value of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. The argument of the learned counsel for the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... those already dealt in the decision of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra). If the Hon'ble Supreme Court is already seized of the matter of challenge to vires of Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA, this Court would be exceeding its jurisdiction, if the same issue is allowed to be agitated before it, knowing all these facts. 05. Mr. Hossain reiterated his objection to other amendments as well, submitting that theses amendments have been sought only after the counter affidavit of answering respondent came on record. 06. By way of reply, Mr. Rohatgi submitted that when Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 411 of 2025 of the petitioner was disposed of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 17.10.2025, it granted liberty to the petitioner to raise all his contentions before the appropriate forum and this includes the challenge to the vires of Section 50 and 63 of PMLA, 2002. Therefore, the petitioner has been granted liberty to raise all the legal contention before this High Court. Mr. Rohatgi referred to the petition filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court submitting that the petitioner challenged the vires of Sections 50 and 63 of the PMLA before Hon'ble Supreme Court and pursuant only upon th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lal Choudhary (supra). In the said decision, three Judges' Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its conclusion in Para-382 held as under: "................................................. 382.22 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. 382.23 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. 382.24 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." Therefore, the vires of Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA, 2002 has already been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra). Further, the issue of constitutionality of Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA, 2002, is also pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case(s) of Govind Singh Vs. Union of India & Anr. (W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....preme Court, this liberty can only be construed to mean that apart from challenging the vires of Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA, the petitioner can raise other issues before this Court. The petitioner cannot stretch the liberty to the extent that all contentions to be raised before this Court would include challenge to the vires of Section 50 and 63 of PMLA. Therefore, I am not persuaded by the submission in this regard made on behalf of the petitioner. 14. So far as contention of Mr. Rohatgi about merits of the amendment not to be seen at the stage of allowing or disallowing the amendment is concerned, I am again not convinced by the said argument. This argument, at first blush, appears attractive for the reason that under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code, all amendments are to be allowed liberally, except for the time barred amendments or the amendments which are mala fide or which change the nature of the suit etc. But the present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and there could be no application of the provisions of the Code in the writ petition filed under Article 226. While considering a writ petition under Article 226, this Court is not necess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. It simply says that in matters for which no provision has been made by those rules, the provisions of the Code shall apply mutatis mutandis insofar as they are not inconsistent with those rules. In the case of Rokyayabi v. Ismail Khan [AIR 1984 Kant 234 : (1984) 2 Kant LC 114] in view of Rule 39 of the writ proceedings rules as framed by the Karnataka High Court making the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure applicable to writ proceedings and writ appeals, it was held that the provisions of the Code were applicable to writ proceedings and writ appeals. 11. We have not been able to appreciate the anxiety on the part of the different courts in judgments referred to above to apply the provisions of the Code to writ proceedings on the basis of Section 141 of the Code. When the Constitution has vested extraordinary power in the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 to issue any order, writ or direction and the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which such High Court is exercising jurisdiction, the procedure for exercising such power and jurisdiction have to be tr....