TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 205
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent No. 1 - ED. ORDER: 1. The Applicants in both aforesaid Revision Applications are arraigned as co-accused in a complaint filed by the Respondent - Enforcement Directorate (ED), under Section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2000 (PMLA) pending before the Special Court at Mapusa Goa (PMLA Court). Since both the Applicants have assailed the common order of taking cognizance and issuing process, raising pari materia identical grounds, both Revision Applications can be disposed of by way of a common order. 2. The facts germane to deciding the issue arising out of the present Revision Applications can be summarized as under:- (i) On 21.07.2015, an FIR was registered which forms the foundational predicate o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondent ED as stipulated by law under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. 7. Inviting the attention of this Court to the order taking cognizance dated 21.07.2018, it was submitted on behalf of the Applicants that as on the date of taking cognizance, no sanction as provided for under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. was obtained by the Respondent ED. Relying on the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Directorate of Enforcement v/s. Bibhu Prasad Acharya - (2025) 1 SCC 404, it was argued that in the said judgment, it was categorically held that Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C. will apply to the provisions of PMLA. Relying further on the replies filed by the Respondent ED, it was argued on behalf of the Applicant that it is undisputed that as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government: [Provided that where the alleged offence was committed by a person referred to in clause (b) during the period while a Proclamation issued under clause (1) of article 356 of the Constitution was in force in a State, clause (b) will apply as if for the expression "State Government" occurring therein, the expression "Central Government" were substituted.] [Explanation.-For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that no sanction shall be required in case of a public servant accused of any offence alleged to have been committed under section 166A, section 166B, section 354, section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de or any other law, it is hereby declared that any sanction accorded by the State Government or any cognizance taken by a court upon such sanction, during the period commencing on the 20th day of August, 1991 and ending with the date immediately preceding the date on which the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1991 (43 of 1991), receives the assent of the President, with respect to an offence alleged to have been committed during the period while a Proclamation issued under clause (1) of article 356 of the Constitution was in force in the State, shall be invalid and it shall be competent for the Central Government in such matter to accord sanction and for the court to take cognizance thereon.] (4) The Central Government ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rce. Section 65 is a prior section which specifically makes the provisions of CrPC applicable to PMLA, subject to the condition that only those provisions of CrPC will apply which are not inconsistent with the provisions of PMLA. Therefore, when a particular provision of CrPC applies to proceedings under PMLA by virtue of Section 65 PMLA, Section 71(1) cannot override the provision of CrPC which applies to PMLA. 25. Once we hold that in view of Section 65 PMLA, Section 197(1) will apply to the provisions of PMLA, Section 71 cannot be invoked to say that the provision of Section 197(1) CrPC will not apply to PMLA. A provision of CrPC, made applicable to PMLA by Section 65, will not be overridden by Section 71. Those provisions of Cr....