9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present case, in short, is that the Petitioner while continuing as Executive Engineer, RWS&S Division, Bhubaneswar during the year 2009 was entangled in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case bearing F.I.R. No. 28 dated 20.08.2009 under Section 13/2 read with Section 13 (1) (e) of the P.C. Act, 1988. A charge sheet was submitted against the Petitioner vide C.S. No. 27 dated 31.12.2015 after lapse of more than 6 years of the institution of the vigilance case. On the basis of the aforesaid vigilance F.I.R., the case was registered by the Enforcement Directorate at Bhubaneswar bearing E.C.I.R. No. 18 dated 27.10.2010 against the present Petitioner. 4. The aforesaid vigilance case was registered as T.R. No. 39 of 2016 before the learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar which was eventually transferred to the Special Judge, Special Court, Bhubaneswar. Pursuant to the summons issued by the aforesaid Court, the Petitioner along with his wife appeared in T.R. Case No. 5/38 of 2017/16 and they were released on bail on their appearance before the trial court. The aforesaid Special Court was established and functioning under Section 21 of the Odisha Special Court Act, 2006 which provides that the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r has approached this Court by filing the present application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. with a prayer to quash order dated 16.08.2022 under Annexure-2 to the present application. 8. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the provision of Section 205 Cr. P.C. He further contended that all criminal trials are to be conducted by following the procedure as prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Be it a general Penal statute or any special penal statute, the trial has to take place by following the procedure or law as prescribed in the Code of Criminal procedure. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there being no prohibition in the PMLA Act with regard to applicability of Section 205 Cr. P.C. and in the absence of any other bar in law with regard to applicability of the Section 205 Cr. P.C. to the trials under the PMLA Act, the learned Court below should have accepted the application filed by the Petitioner under Section 205 of the Cr. P.C. and accordingly keeping in view the fact that the case is lingering for more than a decade, the learned Trial Court should have extended the benefit of Section 205 Cr. P.C. to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e only son of his ailing old parents, who are undergoing treatments for various ailments and that no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution if the trial is carried on in the absence of the accused and while the accused is being represented by his lawyer. The learned Trial Court rejected such application by referring to the provisions contained in Section 45 of the PMLA Act, 2002. 11. During hearing of the aforesaid matter, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner in that case argued that Section 45 of the PMLA Act would not be attracted to the facts of that case and that the learned Trial Court had committed an illegality by rejecting the application under Section 205 Cr. P.C. by relying on the provisions of Section 45 of the PMLA Act. It was also argued that proceeds of crime involved in the aforesaid case is less than Rs. 1 crore, the rigors of the provisions contained in Section 45 of the PMLA Act would not apply to the facts of that case. 12. Mr. G. Agarwal, learned Special Counsel appearing for the E.D. in the above noted case, objected to the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. He further contended that irrespective of the amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petition vide order dated 16.08.2022 was dismissed. 15. It is relevant to mention here that after rejection of the application of the accused-Petitioner in the above noted case, the Petitioner, namely, Chintan Joshi approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing an appeal bearing SLP (C) No.8917 of 2023. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.08.2023 while disposing of the aforesaid SLP has categorically held as follows:- "Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. The blanket exemption as prayed by the petitioner cannot be granted under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, if for sufficient and cogent reasons, the petitioner is unable to appear before the Trial Court, he can always make an application through his advocate for grant of exemption from personal appearance. We are sure if such an application is made, the concerned Court will consider it on its own merits in accordance with law notwithstanding the impugned orders. The Special Leave Petition in disposed of accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of." 16. The factual background involved in the above noted case of Chintan Joshi is almost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is an economic offence, which impacts the national economy and security as a whole. Further, he has taken into consideration Section 45 of the PMLA Act. Finally, considering the gravity of the offences committed and the restrictive provisions of the Act in the shape of Section 45 and to secure the attendance of the accused persons, the application filed by the Petitioner has been rejected. 18. On a careful consideration analysis of the judgment delivered by the Coordinate Bench in Chintan Joshi's case as well as the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in appeal against the order passed in Chintan Joshi's case, further keeping in view the provisions contained in Section 205 Cr. P.C., this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the same is hereby set aside. Further, the matter is remanded back to the Court of Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar to consider the application afresh by taking into consideration the grounds raised by the Petitioner in his application and in the light of the discussion made hereinabove particularly keeping in view the observation of the Hon'b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
