Ved Prakash Yadav Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Rajasthan High Court)
The petitioner, Ved Prakash Yadav, a public servant, filed a petition challenging the order dated 21.03.2024 passed by the Special Judge, PMLA and CBI Cases No.3, Jaipur Metro-I, which took cognizance against him under Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).
Arguments Presented
The petitioner’s counsel argued that as a public servant, the prosecution was invalid because the respondent (Directorate of Enforcement) failed to obtain the required prosecution sanction under Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The counsel asserted that without sanction, neither the charge-sheet could be filed nor could cognizance be taken, and cited several judgments including Enforcement Directorate Vs. Bhibhu Prasad Acharya and Anil Tuteja Vs. Enforcement Directorate.
The counsel for the respondent (ED) opposed this, stating that a search revealed a huge amount of ₹ 2,31,15,000/- in cash along with one gold bar amounting to ₹ 61,00,000/- in a bag kept in an almirah at the petitioner’s residence, all in his possession. The ED’s position was that the alleged offense does not fall within the official discharge of duties, hence sanction under Section 218 of the BNSS was not required. The respondent relied on the judgment in Shambhoo Nath Misra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
