9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (4) TMI 667 - SCH - Money LaunderingMoney Laundering - grant of interim stay of the operation of the impugned summons issued by the petitioner ED - Section 50 of PMLA - HELD THAT - From the section it clearly transpires that the concerned officers as mentioned therein have the power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary either to give evidence or produce any record during the course of investigation or proceeding under the PMLA. Since the petitioner ED is conducting the inquiry / investigation under the PMLA in connection with the four FIRs and since some of the offences of the said FIRs are scheduled offences under PMLA the same would be the investigation/proceeding under the PMLA and the District Collectors or the persons to whom the summons are issued under Section 50(2) of the Act are obliged to respect and respond to the said summons. The operation and execution of the impugned order is stayed pending the present SLPs. The District Collectors shall appear and respond to the summons in question issued by the petitioner ED on the next date that may be indicated by the ED. List after four weeks.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the challenge to a common interim order passed by the High Court of Madras regarding the grant of interim stay on summons issued by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) to District Collectors of various districts in Tamil Nadu. Summary: Issue 1: Challenge to interim order granting stay on ED summons The Special Leave Petitions were filed by the petitioner, Directorate of Enforcement (ED), challenging the interim order passed by the High Court of Madras granting stay on the operation of the impugned summons issued by the ED to District Collectors of Vellore, Trichy, Karur, Thanjavur, and Ariyalur Districts under the PMLA for investigation/proceedings. Details: The High Court granted interim stay on the summons issued by the ED, which was challenged by the ED in the Supreme Court. The summons were issued under Section 50(2) of the PMLA, empowering the ED officers to summon individuals for evidence or record production during investigations. The State of Tamil Nadu filed Writ Petitions against the ED seeking relief that could hinder the ongoing inquiry/investigation by the ED based on FIRs registered for various offenses under the PMLA. Issue 2: Power of ED to issue summons under PMLA The ED issued summons under the powers conferred by Section 50(2) of the PMLA to the District Collectors for their appearance to provide evidence and produce records related to investigations under the PMLA, in connection with scheduled offenses. Details: The ED, conducting inquiries/investigations under the PMLA based on multiple FIRs, required the District Collectors to respond to the summons issued under Section 50(2) of the Act. The officers mentioned in the provision have the authority to summon individuals for evidence or record production during PMLA investigations. The District Collectors were obligated to respect and respond to the summons issued by the ED, considering the nature of the offenses under investigation. Conclusion: The Supreme Court found the Writ Petitions challenging the ED summons to be misconceived, and the High Court's order to be based on a misconception of the law. The operation of the interim order was stayed, and the District Collectors were directed to appear and respond to the summons issued by the ED, pending further proceedings.
|
