Disposed¶53

Shri C Devaraju v. the Deputy Director

Karnataka HC21 Mar 2025WP/19/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NC: 2025:KHC:11827 | WP No. 19 of 2025 (GM-RES), High Court of Karnataka, decided 21-03-2025 by Justice M. Nagaprasanna. Keywords: writ of mandamus; Articles 226 and 227; Enforcement Directorate attachment of property; ECIR; predicate offence; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(e); discharge in predicate offence; Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929; de-attachment and release of property within 3 weeks; disposal of representations Annexures J and K.

What did the court decide?

The respondent - Enforcement Directorate is directed to de-attach the attached property and release it in favour of the petitioner within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, if not earlier. ¶53

Shri C Devaraju Vs the Deputy Director — Corruption | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶53

Issue for consideration

With regard to attachment of the petitioner's property pursuant to registration of an ECIR, whether the Enforcement Directorate can withhold/continue the attached properties despite the petitioner's discharge in the predicate offence becoming final.

¶45

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner has been discharged in the predicate offence and the discharge has become final, the proceedings instituted/continued by the Enforcement Directorate are without authority of law and there is no warrant for the Enforcement Directorate to withhold the attached properties, in light of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India.

¶37

Key takeaways

It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has been discharged in the predicate offence and he would fall within the illustrations of the Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (single Judge, M. Nagaprasanna J.) disposed of Writ Petition No. 19 of 2025 (GM-RES) filed by Shri C Devaraju against the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore Zonal Office. The petitioner, discharged in 2018 in the predicate offence under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, out of which an ECIR was registered pursuant to which the Enforcement Directorate attached his properties in 2021, sought release of the attached property (Schedule S1.1 property per communication dated 02.08.2021) and disposal of his representations (Annexures J and K). Holding that, the discharge having become final, the petitioner fell within the illustrations in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022 SCC OnLine SC 929) and continuance of the ED proceedings was without authority of law, the Court disposed of the petition directing the Enforcement Directorate to de-attach the property and release it to the petitioner within three weeks of receipt of the order, if not earlier.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:11827 WP No. 19 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 19 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI C DEVARAJU AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.LATE CHANNEGOWDA, NO.28, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, 7TH BLOCK, BANASHANKARI III STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 087.

¶9

PRESENTLY AT: NO.5, GURUSARVABHOOMANAGAR, NAYANDAHALLI, BEHIND THE CLUB, MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE 560 039.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA K., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, BANGALORE ZONAL OFFICE, 3RD FLOOR, 'B' BLOCK BMTC-TTMC BUILDING, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN M., ADV.,)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:11827 WP No. 19 of 2025

¶19

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTIONS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO PASS ORDERS/ DISPOSE OF REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS AS FOUND AT ANNEXURE -J AND K AND ETC.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court, seeking the following prayers:

¶23

"i. To issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent to pass orders / dispose of representations of the petitioners as found at ANNEXURE - J and K;

¶24

ii. To issue a direction to the respondent to release/handover the attached property /schedule S1.1 property to the petitioner as mentioned in the communication dated 02.08.2021 (Annexure A).

¶25

iii. To allow this writ petition and issue any other appropriate writ or direction or pass any other orders as this Hon'ble court deems fit to pass in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶26

Heard Sri. Chandrashekara K., learned counsel

¶27

appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Unnikrishnan M., learned

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:11827 WP No. 19 of 2025

¶30

counsel appearing for the respondent and have perused the material on record.

¶31

following order:

¶32

"Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶33

The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction for release of his properties, which comes to be attached by the Enforcement Directorate in the year 2021.

¶34

The Enforcement Case Information Report or ECIR was registered pursuant to the registration of a predicate offence for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶35

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been discharged in the predicate offence i.e., the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act in the year 2018 itself.

¶36

In the light of the discharge, the very proceedings instituted by or continued by the Enforcement Directorate becomes without authority of law in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS. V/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 929.

¶37

Therefore, there is no warrant for the Enforcement Directorate to withhold the properties attached notwithstanding the discharge and the order of discharge becoming final.

¶38

Sri. M. Unnikrishnan, learned CGC for the respondent seeks time upto 21.03.2025 to redeem the grievance of the petitioner.

¶39

List the matter on 21.03.2025 in the 'fresh matters list' ."

¶40

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:11827 WP No. 19 of 2025

¶42

It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has been

¶43

discharged in the predicate offence and he would fall within those illustrations of the Apex Court as held in the case of

¶44

VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS. V. UNION OF INDIA¹ .

¶45

The issue in the lis is with regard to attachment of the property of registering a Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against the petitioner.

¶46

In the light of the discharge of the petitioner in the predicate offence and it becoming final as on date, learned counsel, Sri. Unnikrishnan M., representing the Enforcement Directorate on instructions would submit that the attached

¶47

property would be released in favour of the petitioner, if reasonable time would be granted.

¶48