N. Dhanraj Kochar Vs Director (Madras High Court)
Summary: The Madras High Court considered the maintainability of a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of ECIR No. CEZO-I/39/2021 dated 31.03.2021. The Enforcement Directorate had registered the ECIR after seven FIRs were registered by the Central Crime Branch, Chennai, against Dhanraj Kochar and others for offences under Sections 120-B and 420 IPC involving allegations of forgery, cheating and land grabbing. Since those FIRs disclosed commission of a scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the ED commenced investigation. The Registry raised a doubt about whether an ECIR could be challenged through the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, and the matter was therefore placed for hearing on maintainability. The petitioners relied on Arun Kumar Mishra Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 8658, and Ajanta Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 8659, where petitions under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of ECIR proceedings had been entertained. The Madras High Court declined to rely on those decisions because they contained no discussion on the maintainability of such petitions. Referring to Section 482 CrPC and earlier precedent, the Court held that the inherent power is concerned with giving effect to orders under the Code, preventing abuse of the process of a court, or otherwise securing the ends of justice in the context of court proceedings. The Court emphasized that an ECIR is not registered under the CrPC and is not akin to an FIR registered under Section 154 CrPC. Relying on The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement Vs. Justin Devadoss @ David and Others, it reiterated that an ECIR is an administrative form used by the Enforcement Directorate to commence investigation under the PMLA and has no independent adjudicatory significance. Registration of an ECIR is therefore an administrative act under a special statute and cannot be quashed through Section 482 CrPC. The Court also relied on K. Rajamanickam and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Inspector General and Another, State of W.B. and Others Vs. Sujit Kumar Rana, and State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar and Others regarding the scope of inherent jurisdiction. It concluded that registration of an ECIR by ED officers cannot be subjected to judicial review under Section 482 CrPC. The Registry’s objection was upheld and the petition was dismissed as not maintainable at the SR stage.
Cases Discussed
- Arun Kumar Mishra Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 8658 (Delhi High Court) — The petitioners relied on the decision; the Court declined to rely on it because it did not discuss maintainability of a Section 482 CrPC petition for quashing ECIR proceedings.
- Ajanta Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 8659 (Delhi High Court) — The petitioners relied on the decision; the Court declined to rely on it because it did not discuss the maintainability issue before the Court.
- The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement Vs. Justin Devadoss @ David and Others, 2021-1-L.W.(Crl.) 605 (Madras High Court) — Relied upon for the nature of an ECIR as an administrative form used by ED to commence investigation and its distinction from an FIR under Section 154 CrPC.
- K. Rajamanickam and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Inspector General and Another, 2015 (3) MWN (Cr.) 379 (DB) (Madras High Court) — Relied upon on the scope of the High Court’s inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
- State of W.B. and Others Vs. Sujit Kumar Rana, (2004) 4 SCC 129 (Supreme Court) — Relied upon for the proposition that Section 482 power operates in relation to matters or proceedings before a criminal court.
- State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar and Others, (2011) 14 SCC 770 (Supreme Court) — Relied upon on the requirement that the relevant proceedings be pending in a subordinate court when inherent jurisdiction is invoked to secure the ends of justice.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
