9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of the PMLA, it is clear and conspicuous that the scheme of the law beyond doubt does not contemplate an analogous trial of scheduled offences and the offence under the PMLA by the designated court in each and every case. In the case at hand, the authority under the PMLA has not moved the learned Special court at Bolangir for committal of the case in respect of the scheduled offence to the PMLA court at Bhubaneswar and therefore, it has been challenged by the petitioners since the PMLA court on receiving complaint has already summoned them. After having a detailed discussion, the conclusion is that if an application is moved by the competent authority under the PMLA after exercising its discretion for committal of a case in view of Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA only in appropriate cases and in the interest of justice, in and under such circumstances, the Special court shall have to examine it and take a decision for committal of the case to the designated court under the PMLA and not otherwise. However, in the humble view of the Court, the PMLA authority should examine the plea of the petitioners applying its discretion and in the event found to be a fit case for committ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liable to be quashed with consequential direction for transmission of the record in connection with Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No. 54 of 2013 to the PMLA court for a joint trial and its analogous disposal. 5. Referring to clause(c) of Section 44(1) of the PMLA, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the said provision demands the Special court also to try the Vigilance case which is required to be committed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bolangir. It is further submitted that the aforesaid provision begins with a non-obstante clause and on a plain reading of the same, it would appear that both the cases one in respect of the scheduled/predicate offence(s) and the other under PMLA are to be tried analogously by the learned PMLA court. While contending so, the decision of the Apex Court in Bijaya Madan Lal Choudhury Vrs. Union of India others decided on 27th July, 2022 by the Apex Court is placed reliance on. It is contended that in order to accelerate trial of both the cases, Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA stipulates that the Authority under the PMLA is to submit an application before the Special court authorized to try scheduled offences where after the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding that exercise of such power is an exception. 8. As per Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA, it is specified that if the court which has taken cognizance of the scheduled offence is other than the Special court which has taken cognizance of the complaint of the offence of money laundering under clause(b), it shall, on an application by the authority authorized to file a complaint under the PMLA, commit the case to the Special court which, on receipt of the same, shall proceed to deal with it from the stage when it is committed. In view of clause(a) of sub-section (1) of Section 44 of the PMLA, an offence punishable under the said Act and any connected scheduled offence shall be triable by the designated court constituted for the area in which the offence has been committed provided that the Special court trying the scheduled offence before the commencement of the Act shall continue to try such scheduled offence. Having gone through the relevant provisions of the PMLA, it is made to understand that a complaint by an authority authorized under the PMLA to be filed before the designated court cognizance of which shall be taken under Section 3 thereof without the accused being committe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt and the other with the court under the PMLA. In such a situation, Section 41(1)(c) of the PMLA confers the authority to make an application with a request to the Special court to commit the case relating to the scheduled offence to the designated court under the PMLA and unless such an application is so moved, the enquiry and trial vis- -vis the predicate offence shall be continued in the court of competent jurisdiction. 10. The question is, whether, it is mandatory for the PMLA authority to seek committal of the case related to the scheduled offence and in case such an option is exercised, if the Special court as a matter of course bound to allow it? 11. The legislative intent does not make the provision under Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA obligatory on the authorized officer invariably to make an application for committal. Had it been so, there would have been no reason of any committal under Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA which again depends on an application of the PMLA authority. If such was the object and purpose of the law, then it should have been expressly made clear about a joint trial of the offences under the PMLA and the Special Act. No doubt, Section 71 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
