Lakshmikant Khemka v. Union of India

Union of India through the Directorate of Enforcement, having its office at Kaushalya Chambers-II, Pee Pee Compound, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Lower Chutia, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) Shri Swapan Bose, Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Pee Pee Compound, Kaushalya Chambers-II, Ranchi, Subzonal Office, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District- Ranchi … Opposite Parties ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners For the ED : Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, Advocate : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate ----- 19/30.08.2024 Heard Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the Directorate of Enforcement.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Supplementary Complaint under Sections 44 and 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, dated 03.05.2019 in ECIR 02/PAT/2009/AD, registered for the offence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money -1- With A.B.A. No. 5890 of 2023 A.B.A. No. 4147 of 2023 Laundering Act, 2002, pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, CBI cum Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi.

Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that now the complaint has already been filed by the Directorate of Enforcement. He submits that the petitioners have co-operated in the investigation and they were not arrested in course of investigation and in view of that, the role of Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act has already been over and this aspect of the matter has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office, reported in (2024) 7 SCC 61. He submits that now the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is being followed and further the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered this aspect of the matter in Nalini Prusty v. Enforcement Directorate [Cr. Appeal No.3106 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.6618 of 2024].

Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the Directorate of Enforcement submits that the allegations against the petitioners are serious, however, he is not disputing the ratio of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal (supra).

In view of the above and considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal (supra), the order dated

06.04.2023 passed in A.B.P. No.685 of 2023 and the order dated 06.04.2023 passed in A.B.P. No.686 of 2023 are, hereby, set aside. The petitioners are -2- With A.B.A. No. 5890 of 2023 A.B.A. No. 4147 of 2023 hereby directed to comply the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal (supra) as disclosed in paragraph 20 of the said judgment, within two weeks and the learned Court will pass order on the basis of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal (supra).

If the petitioners will not comply the direction issued by this order within the aforesaid period and if they will not appear before the concerned Court, this order will not apply upon the petitioners.

With the above observation and direction, these applications are disposed of. Ajay/ (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) -3- With A.B.A. No. 5890 of 2023 A.B.A. No. 4147 of 2023