E-Paper
Panchkula industrial plots allotment: SC order to have a bearing on money laundering trial
The apex court had in 2021 stayed the PMLA court’s trial against former Haryana chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda and 21 others
The Supreme Court (SC) has reserved the judgment in a bunch of petitions pertaining to the interpretation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), including whether the trial under the act can proceed without the CBI filing a chargesheet in the case.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice AM Khanwilkar and comprising Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice CT Ravikumar on March 15 reserved the judgment after the arguments in the matter were concluded. “Arguments concluded. Judgment reserved. Learned counsel for both sides are permitted to file supplementary written submissions, notes, if so advised, within two weeks from today,” said the order.
The outcome of the apex court orders will have a bearing on the Panchkula industrial plots allotment case involving former Haryana chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda. The SC had on August 19, 2021, granted a stay on the PMLA court’s trial against Hooda and 21 others in the Panchkula industrial plots allotment case. The stay was granted on the basis of a December-2019 order of the apex court.
In its order, the SC had stayed trial in a similar PMLA case pending before the special court, principal sessions judge, city civil court, Chennai. The December-2019 SC order came after a bench of the Madras High Court had dismissed a petition which sought quashing of the PMLA proceedings as the predicate or scheduled offence investigated by the CBI was closed by the order of the court.
As per the August-2021 order of the apex court, Vikram Chaudhari, counsel of the petitioner and an accused in the Panchkula industrial plots allotment case, Lt Col OP Dahiya (retd) had invited the attention of the apex court to the December 2019 order passed in a special leave petition and sought similar interim protection for the petitioner as the facts and circumstances are similar to that petition.
‘No trial has begun for predicate offence’
About the grounds taken by Lt Col Dahiya in his petition before the apex court, his counsel Vikram Chaudhari said that since the CBI has not filed a chargesheet in the Panchkula case and no trial has begun for the predicate or scheduled offence, the trial under the PMLA cannot proceed.
“We have also challenged a 2019 amendment in Section 44 of the PMLA wherein an explanation was inserted,’’ Chaudhari said. The explanation inserted said that the jurisdiction of special court while dealing with the offence under the PMLA, during investigation, enquiry or trial under this act, shall not be dependent upon any orders passed in respect of the scheduled offence, and the trial of both sets of offences by the same court shall not be construed as joint trial.
Chaudhari said the SC had in Nikesh Tarachand Shah case in 2017 held that trial of both the predicate offences and the PMLA go together. However, the 2019 amendment in the PMLA changed this, he said, adding the amendment is also under challenge.
ED filed chargesheet in 2021
The enforcement directorate (ED) had in February 2021 file a prosecution complaint (a chargesheet) under the PMLA in a trial court against Hooda and others in the Panchkula case despite the fact that CBI, which was probing the matter, was yet to submit a chargesheet for the predicate offences registered under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The ED says that every scheduled offence is a predicate offence and the occurrence of the same is a prerequisite for initiating investigation into the offence of money laundering. The predicate offences are investigated by agencies such as police, customs, SEBI, NCB and CBI, under their respective acts.
