The Madras High Court has clarified that a court cannot direct the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to register a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) merely on the finding that a predicate offence exists. The court emphasized that it is within the realm of the ED to register an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) based on their own satisfaction.
Court's Observations on ED's Discretion
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan stated on Friday that the registration of an FIR in a predicate offence does not automatically compel the ED to register an ECIR. Instead, it depends on the satisfaction of the authorized officer based on the materials available from the predicate case. The bench added that the court cannot substitute the satisfaction of the ED, which must be arrived at in accordance with the PMLA.
Dismissal of Pleas by DMK MP
The court made these observations while dismissing pleas filed by DMK MP R Girirajan, who sought the registration of cases by the ED against seven former AIADMK ministers and Tamil Nadu BJP leaders based on pending corruption cases against them. The bench made it clear that it expresses no opinion on whether the ED should initiate proceedings under the PMLA, leaving that decision to the ED based on available materials.
Reference to Supreme Court Precedent
Citing the Supreme Court's order in the R Madhavan Pillai case, the bench noted that the apex court had set aside a high court order that directed the ED to register an ECIR where the high court had prima facie concluded that a predicate offence existed. This reinforces the principle that the ED's discretion cannot be overridden by judicial directions.
