9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 238 - HC - Money LaunderingTerritorial Jurisdiction to hear the case - transfer of case to special court - Prayer to set aside the return Docket Order - bail application - HELD THAT - Whatever the offence that has been alleged against anyone, which is punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA Act, that has to be tried only by Special Courts designated under Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act by virtue of the notification of the Central Government issued in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned, where the proposed Court is located - by virtue of the notification dated 05.02.2016, the Central Government already exercised such powers in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court and Courts have been designated as Special Courts. When that being the position, since the territorial jurisdiction of the case in hand is in Chennai District only, therefore Chennai being one of the jurisdictional area under the notification issued by the Central Government, which comes under the jurisdiction of the Principal District Judge, Chennai, naturally the said case has to be tried in the said Court, since the alleged offence is to be punished only under Section 4 of the PMLA Act. The very transfer of the case or made over made by the learned Principal Judge, Chennai by transferring the case papers to the Special Court No.I for Trial of Cases exclusively against MLAs and MPs, is not in consonance with Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act vis-avis the notification issued by the Central Government dated 05.02.2016 under notification No.SO.370(E). Therefore, the bail application filed by the petitioner in the said C.C., also has to be heard and disposed only by the Principal Judge, Chennai. There shall be a direction to the Principal Judge, Chennai to withdraw the made over on C.C.No.9 of 2023 on the file of the said Court and accordingly entertain the bail application in Criminal M.P.SR.No.21974 of 2023 by numbering the same, if it is otherwise in order, and decide the said application after hearing both sides, at the earliest - Petition disposed off.
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the bail application. 2. Transfer of case papers to the appropriate court. 3. Compliance with Section 43(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA Act). Summary: Jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the bail application: The petitioner, a sitting MLA, was arrested and filed a bail application before the Special Court-I for the Trial of Cases relating to MPs and MLAs. The Special Court-I returned the application, stating it was not notified under Section 43 of the PMLA Act, directing it to be filed before the Principal Judge, Chennai. The Principal Judge also returned the application, directing it back to the Special Court-I. This led to the petitioner filing the present original petition. Transfer of case papers to the appropriate court: The Principal Judge, Chennai, had transferred the case papers to the Special Court-I for Trial of Cases against MLAs and MPs. However, the Special Court-I returned the bail application, citing lack of notification under Section 43 of the PMLA Act. The Principal Judge, Chennai, reiterated that the case records were made over to the Special Court-I, leading to confusion about the appropriate court for the bail application. Compliance with Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act: Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act empowers the Central Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, to designate Special Courts for trial of offenses under the Act. The Central Government had issued a notification on 05.02.2016 designating the Principal District Judge, Chennai, as a Special Court for such offenses. The Court noted that the transfer of the case to the Special Court-I was not in consonance with Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act and the notification. Judgment: The Court directed the Principal Judge, Chennai, to withdraw the made-over case from the Special Court-I and entertain the bail application. The impugned return orders by both courts were set aside. The Principal Judge was instructed to number the bail application and decide it at the earliest. The Registry was directed to return the original bail application case papers to the petitioner's counsel. The Criminal Original Petition was disposed of with these directions.
|
