Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the Enforcement Directorate for initiating a money laundering probe against a realty developer without “proper application of mind”, noting central agencies must conduct themselves within framework of law.
While imposing the fine on the ED, a single bench of Justice Milind Jadhav observed that a “strong message” needs to be sent to the law enforcement agencies to ensure citizens are not harassed.
The HC quashed process (summons/notice) issued to a Mumbai-based real estate developer, Rakesh Jain, by a special court in August 2014 based on a prosecution complaint filed by the anti-money laundering agency.
It was “high time that central agencies like the ED stopped taking the law in the own hands and harass citizens”, Justice Jadhav maintained.
The ED had launched money laundering probe against Jain based on a police complaint lodged against him at the suburban Vile Parle police station by a property purchaser alleging breach of agreement and cheating.
Justice Jadhav, in his ruling, noted no case was made out against Jain and hence even the money laundering charges do not stand.
The HC said the action of the complainant as well as the ED in putting the criminal system into motion against Jain is “clearly malafide and calls for imposition of exemplary costs”.
“I am compelled to levy exemplary costs because a strong message needs to be sent to the law enforcement agencies like ED that they should conduct themselves within the parameters of law and that they cannot take law into their own hands without application of mind and harass citizens,” Justice Jadhav said.
The court directed the ED to pay the Rs 1 lakh cost to the HC library within four weeks. The bench also imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the original complainant (purchaser) in the case. This cost would be paid to the city-based Kirtikar Law Library.
The HC pointed out that an offence of money laundering is committed by an individual with a deliberate design and a motive to enhance his gains, disregarding the interest of the nation and society as a whole.
“It is seen that conspiracy of money laundering is hatched in secrecy and executed in darkness. The present case before me is a classic case of oppression in the garb of implementation of the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act),” the judgment noted.
On the request of ED advocate Shriram Shirsat, the HC stayed its judgment for one week so that the agency could file an appeal in the Supreme Court.
