WP(Crl.) No. 01 of 2015. Case: Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management University Vs The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India and Ors.. Sikkim High Court

Case NumberWP(Crl.) No. 01 of 2015
CounselFor Appellant: Shakeel Ahmed, Chitra Sharma, Yogesh Kumar Sharma and S.P. Bhutia, Advocates and For Respondents: Karma Thinlay Namgyal, Central Government Advocate and Pollin Rai, Advocate
JudgesSonam Phintso Wangdi, J.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 482; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 120B, 201, 420, 467, 471; Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 - Sections 2, 2(1)(y), 26, 3, 5, 8
Judgement DateSeptember 17, 2015
CourtSikkim High Court


Sonam Phintso Wangdi, J.

  1. The Petitioner is a State Private University created under the Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management University Act, 2006 (Act No. 4 of 2006) (hereinafter referred to as "EIILMU Act"). In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner-University seeks to quash Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) No. KLZO/01/2014/825-827 dated 19-02-2014, Annexure P/2, registered against the persons connected with the Petitioner-University in various capacities for offences under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "PMLA") corresponding to Sections 420/467/120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC").

  2. The ground raised in the Writ Petition invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") are primarily the following:--

    "(a) No cognizable case is at all made out firstly, for the reason that the case under PMLA was registered by the Respondents merely on the information of the Sikkim Police and not by application of their own mind and, secondly, on the bare perusal of the ECIR no offence is made out either under Part A or Part B of "scheduled offence" as defined under Clause (y) of Sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the PMLA.

    (b) That the contents of the ECIR would reveal that the allegations are only in respect of violation of provisions of University Grants Commission Act, the EIILMU Act and the Distance Education Council Regulations which would not attract criminality.

    (c) No offence under the PMLA has been made out as no tainted money arising out of the proceeds of crime and its laundering or layering into the mainstream have been made out.

    (d) The Petitioner-University has not earned any proceed of crime as its only source of income is the fees collected from the students with which the Petitioner-University had also purchased land against legitimate documents of ownership for setting up its campuses.

    (e) Section 3 of the PMLA is dependent upon the offences under the Indian Penal Code which first requires establishment of the commission of the 'scheduled offences' against the Petitioner in order for its income to fall within the meaning of proceeds of crime.

    (f) The action against the Petitioner-University under the PMLA is premature inasmuch as unless there is conviction in the criminal case under Sections 420/467/471/201/120B IPC filed against them in pursuance of the charge-sheet, Annexure P/12, it cannot be said that offences under the PMLA have been made out against them.

    (g) For the reasons aforesaid, the order of provisional attachment dated 28-10-2014, Annexure P/18, under Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the PMLA and, the subsequent order of its confirmation dated 03-03-2015, Annexure R/1, of the Adjudicating Authority in respect of 9 (nine) different bank accounts, were...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT