Case Note & Summary
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) filed a criminal writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of an order dated 19th September 2020 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, Mumbai, which rejected ED's application to intervene in a closure report filed by the State of Maharashtra. The closure report was in connection with a private complaint filed by Akbar Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. against Jet Airways (India) Limited and others alleging offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The ED argued that it had a right to be heard as the closure report might affect its ongoing investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The State of Maharashtra and the private respondents opposed the petition, contending that the ED had no locus standi in the matter. The court examined the short question of whether the ED has locus to intervene in a closure report filed by the State in a private complaint case. The court held that the ED is not an aggrieved party and has no right to intervene in the closure report proceedings, which are essentially between the State and the Magistrate. The court noted that the ED's remedy, if any, lies elsewhere and not by way of intervention in the closure report. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and the impugned orders were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Locus Standi - Intervention in Closure Report - Section 173, 482 Cr.P.C., Article 227 Constitution of India - ED sought to intervene in closure report filed by State in a private complaint case alleging cheating and forgery - Held that ED has no locus as it is not an aggrieved party and the closure report is between the State and the Magistrate; ED's remedy lies elsewhere (Paras 2, 10-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has locus to intervene in a closure report filed by the State of Maharashtra in a private complaint case before the Magistrate.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The impugned orders are upheld.
Law Points
- Locus standi
- Closure report
- Private complaint
- Intervention
- Directorate of Enforcement
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- 1973
- Section 173
- Section 482
- Article 227
Case Details
2020 LawText (BOM) (12) 70
Criminal Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 3122 of 2020
Mr. Anil Singh, ASG with Mr. Aditya Thakkar and Mr. Shreeram Shirsat for the Petitioner; Mr. Raja Thakare, Spl. P.P. with Mr. Akash Kavade, Mr. Siddharth Jagushte, Mr. Deepak Thakre, P.P. and Ms. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1–State; Mr. Akhilesh S. Dubey with Mr. Vagish Mishra, Mr. Dharmesh S. Joshi, Mr. Parag T. Joshi, Mr. Amit Dubey, Mr. Uttam Dubey and Mr. Rajuram Kuleriya i/b T. D. Joshi & Associates for the Respondent No. 2; Mr. Aabad H. Ponda, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Samsher Garud and Ms. Juhi Valia i/b Jayakar & Partners for the Respondent No. 4; Mr. Pranav Badheka with Mr. Samsher Garud and Ms. Juhi Valia i/b Jayakar & Partners for the Respondent No. 5
Directorate of Enforcement
The State of Maharashtra, Akbar Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Jet Airways (India) Limited, Naresh Kumar Goyal, Anita Naresh Goyal
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of orders rejecting ED's application to intervene in a closure report.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the impugned order dated 19th September 2020 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and the order dated 15th October 2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
Filing Reason
ED sought to intervene in a closure report filed by the State of Maharashtra in a private complaint case, which was rejected by the Magistrate and upheld by the Sessions Court.
Previous Decisions
The learned Magistrate rejected ED's application to intervene in the closure report; the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the criminal revision application against that order.
Issues
Whether the Directorate of Enforcement has locus standi to intervene in a closure report filed by the State in a private complaint case.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner (ED) argued that it has a right to be heard as the closure report may affect its ongoing investigation under PMLA.
Respondents argued that ED has no locus standi as it is not an aggrieved party and the closure report is between the State and the Magistrate.
Ratio Decidendi
The Directorate of Enforcement has no locus standi to intervene in a closure report filed by the State in a private complaint case under Section 173 Cr.P.C., as it is not an aggrieved party and the proceedings are between the State and the Magistrate.
Judgment Excerpts
The short question that arises in the aforesaid petition is, the locus of the petitioner-ED in a closure report filed by the State of Maharashtra before the Magistrate, in a case registered at the behest of respondent No.2-Akbar Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Procedural History
Akbar Travels filed a private complaint; State filed a closure report; ED applied to intervene; Magistrate rejected application on 19.09.2020; ED filed Criminal Revision Application No. 400 of 2020; Additional Sessions Judge dismissed revision on 15.10.2020; ED filed present writ petition.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 173, Section 482
- Constitution of India: Article 227
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 120-B, Section 420, Section 467, Section 471
