Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (5) TMI 225

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... criminal case under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Another stipulation in this observation that since the civil proceeding is separate and distinct proceeding, the show cause filed by the petitioners or evidence led by the petitioners before the adjudicating authority will be in no way used by the prosecuting agency against the petitioners in the criminal trial pending before the Learned Vigilance Judge. This Court hastens to add that the petitioners should file their show cause before the adjudicating authority within a period of 15 days. Provisional attachment is valid for 180 days and in the meantime since substantial time has elapsed during the pendency of this writ application and the earlier writ applicati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he proceeding being a civil proceeding and the substantive criminal proceeding initiated by the State Vigilance being pending before a competent Court having jurisdiction to try criminal cases and without registration of any complaint against him under the PML Act, 2002, is hit by Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India and in essence the petitioners prayed that the petitioner no. 2 cannot be compelled to give evidence against himself. So, the petitioners contended that as per several rulings of the Hon ble Supreme Court, a person cannot be compelled to give evidence against himself and filing show cause in civil proceeding like the proceeding under the PML Act, 2002 will be used as evidence against him in the criminal proceeding. The af .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s and on such event, opposite party no. 2 shall act upon production of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application is disposed of. Thereafter, the application filed by the petitioner before the Adjudicating Authority was rejected on 15-6-2017 by opposite party No. 1 in O.C. No. 722 of 2017. In the said order opposite party no. 1 rejected the petitioners application to keep the civil proceeding in abeyance for confirmation of the provisional order of attachment during pendency of the trial. Such order is impugned in this writ application. 2. It may be stated that like the case of the present petitioners, some other applications were also considered by this Court and almost similar order was p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... icating authority, which may be utilized against the appellant in the criminal trial pending before the appropriate criminal courts, there is every likelihood of utilizing the same against him, which will cause prejudice to the appellant. 12. In response to the above submission of the Learned Counsel for the appellant, Shri A.K. Bose, Learned Asstt. Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India contended that the proceedings before the adjudicating authority are summary in nature and confined to the provisions of the PML Act, 2002 where only prima facie findings are to be recorded and he has thus submitted that the findings arrived at by the adjudicating authority will have no binding effect on the criminal courts trying the case ag .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty within a period of 15 days. 5. Another aspect of the case is that the Learned Asstt. Solicitor General submitted that the provisional attachment is valid for 180 days and in the meantime since substantial time has elapsed during the pendency of this writ application and the earlier writ application, the said time should not be counted while calculating 180 days as stipulated in Section 5(1) of the PML Act, 2002. In other words, the entire period for which the two writ applications filed by the petitioners were pending before this Court till the disposal of the writ applications and 15 days given to the petitioners to file the show cause shall be excluded while calculating 180 days as envisaged in the aforesaid provision. 6. With su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates