The Patna High Court has held that the Enforcement Directorate loses power to arrest once a special court takes cognizance under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The bench of Justice Satyavrat Verma has relied on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal vs. the Directorate of Enforcement, Jalandhar Zonal Office in which it was held that once an ECIR is filed and the accused is not arrested during the course of investigation and thereafter cognizance is taken based on the complaint filed by the ED in that event, the ED loses its power to arrest the accused without seeking permission of the Special Court.
The applicant filed the petition seeking anticipatory bail.
An FIR came to be instituted in the year 2013 with respect to the predicate offences in which petitioner was also made an accused. It is next submitted that the ED came into picture in the year 2016 when an ECIR was instituted.
The petitioner was called by the ED during the course of investigation and the petitioner cooperated in the investigation all throughout i.e. the petitioner cooperated with the ED in the investigation from 2016 till 2022 i.e. when the complaint came to be filed.
The ED during the course of investigation never felt the need of arresting the petitioner. It is next submitted that since ED during the course of investigation never felt the need of arresting the petitioner whether it would be prudent for this Court to send the petitioner to jail based on cognizance which came to be taken based on the complaint which was filed by the ED after investigation in the year 2022.
The petitioner submitted that also an FIR was instituted for the predicate offence based on which the instant ECIR was instituted and the petitioner during the course of investigation always cooperated with the ED. The ED never felt the need of arresting the petitioner, thereafter the complaint came to be filed based on which cognizance was taken, thus, the petitioner apprehends his arrest and hence has moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail.
The court while disposing of the anticipatory bail application held that ED during the course of investigation never felt the need of arresting the petitioner and after cognizance is taken of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA based on a complaint under Section 44(1)(b) of the PMLA, the ED and its officers are powerless to exercise power under Section 19 of the PMLA to arrest a person shown as an accused in the complaint.
Case Details
Case Title: Ganesh Prasad Singh Versus The Union of India
Case No.: Criminal Miscellaneous No.68054 Of 2024
Date: 12/02/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Anurag Saurav, Abhinav Alok, Prity Kumari, Anjaneya Singh
Counsel For Respondent: Dr. K.N. Rai (A.D.S.G.) Mr. Tuhin Shankar, Manoj Kumar Singh Mr. Ankit Kumr Singh, Shivaditya Dhari Sinha
Read More: Centre Invites Comments On The Draft Of Advocates (Amendment) Bill 2025
