In a recent decision, the Delhi High Court observed that the prosecution initiated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is liable to be quashed when accused is acquitted/discharged in a predicate offence.
The present petition was filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of the complaint filed by the respondent/Directorate of Enforcement ( ED ) for the offence under section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”) punishable under section 4 of PMLA arising out of ECIR bearing no. ECIR/7/DZ/2008 dated 12.05.2008 along with consequential proceedings pending before the concerned court.
The case is premised on an allegation that Dr. Jeevan Kumar, along with others, was involved in illegal racket of kidney transplantation and committed various offences including the offence punishable under section 307 IPC and the offences punishable under sections 18/19/20 of TOHO Act which are scheduled offences under PMLA. It was also alleged that illegal kidney transplantation was the only occupation of Dr. Jeevan Kumar and his entire earnings were from this source only.
The issue which needs consideration is that if in case an accused is acquitted/discharged in a predicate offence, in that eventuality, whether the prosecution initiated by the respondent/ED can be allowed to be continued or is liable to be quashed.
The counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that in view of the fact that the co-accused Dr. Jeevan Kumar has been acquitted by the trial court, the present complaint filed by the ED is not maintainable. In this regard, he places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary V Union of India.
The Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) appearing for the respondent/ED submitted that in view of the fact that one of the co-accused has been acquitted in respect of the predicate offence, the present complaint cannot be quashed.
A Single Bench of Dr Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain observed that “In view of the aforesaid legal position, the complaint filed by the respondent/ED and the consequential proceedings cannot survive. Considering that the co-accused Dr. Jeevan Kumar has been acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 22.03.2013 and that the said judgment has not been challenged till date, there can be no offence of money laundering under section 3 of PMLA against the petitioner. Accordingly, the ECIR bearing no. ECIR/7/DZ/2008 is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom stated to be pending before the concerned court.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
