Allowed

Sandeep v. Union of India, through the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India

Patna HC7 Oct 2024CR. MISC./21966/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed an application for exemption from personal appearance in a Special Trial under the P.M.L. Act. The court quashed the earlier rejection order, relying on a Supreme Court judgment and the petitioner's undertaking to appear through counsel, noting the Investigation Agency's lack of objection.

What did the court decide?

The application for exemption from personal appearance is allowed; the impugned order dated 04.02.2023 is quashed.

Sandeep Vs Union of India, through the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21966 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-958 Year-2018 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

SANDEEP SON OF AWADHESH PRASAD SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAA, MAIN ROAD, SHIVPURI, PS- SHASTRINAGAR, DIST- PATNA

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 1ST FLOOR, CHANDRAPURA PLACE, BANK ROAD, PATNA- 800001

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hemant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.K.N. Singh(A.S.G.) ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 07-10-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Enforcement Directorate Shri Manoj Kumar Singh.

¶13

This application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the order dated 4.2.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Patna in Spl. Trial (P.M.L. Act) No. 10 of 2018 (arising out of ECIR No. 21/Pat/2012) in Complaint Case No. 958 of 2018 by which this application under Section 205 for exemption from personal appearance in the trial has been rejected by the concerned Special Judge.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21966 of 2023(4) dt.07-10-2024 2/3

¶16

a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Lal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement reported in 2024 INSC 434 and has submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the application of the petitioner filed under Section 205 Cr.P.C. has been allowed in the scheduled offence.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner will co-operate in the trial and he will be represented through his lawyer on each and every date and he will appear personally before the learned Special Judge, as and when directed by the learned Special Judge.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner will not dispute his identity before the Special Judge in the trial.

¶20

Learned counsel for the enforcement directorate Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh submits that since the petitioner is undertaking to appear through his lawyer before the concerned Special Judge regularly, he has no objection if the application for exemption under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶21

In view of the statement of the learned counsel for the enforcement directorate, the undertaking of the petitioner and also considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21966 of 2023(4) dt.07-10-2024 3/3

¶23

Court in the case of Tarsem Lal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement (supra) , this application is allowed.

¶24

Accordingly, the order dated 4.2.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Patna in Spl. Trial (P.M.L. Act) No. 10 of 2018 (arising out of ECIR No. 21/Pat/2012) in Complaint Case No. 958 of 2018, is hereby quashed.

¶25

The petitioner is exempted from personal appearance before the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, P.M.L. Act in Spl. Trial (P.M.L. Act) No. 10 of 2018 (arising out of ECIR No. 21/Pat/2012) in Complaint Case No. 958 of 2018 and he will file an application giving an undertaking as mentioned above.

¶26

This application stands allowed.

¶27

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶28

Vikas/-

¶29

Sandeep v. Union of India, through the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep v. Union of India, through the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Yuvraj Kumar @ Yuvraj Singh @ Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramsurat Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Ekabal Miyan @ Ekbal Mian @ Bala Mian Vs The State of Bihar

Sabir Hussain Vs The State of Bihar

Pravin Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar