Patna High Court Sets Aside Cognizance in Money Laundering Case Citing Violation of Pre-Cognizance Hearing Requirement

Court Remands Case for Fresh Consideration, Emphasizing Adherence to Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

In a landmark judgment, the Patna High Court has set aside the cognizance taken by the Special Court in a high-profile money laundering case against Pushpraj Bajaj. The Court, presided over by Justice Arun Kumar Jha, found that the statutory requirement under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), mandating a pre-cognizance hearing for the accused, was not adhered to, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

The case revolves around allegations against Bajaj and others related to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Special Court had taken cognizance of the case based on prosecution complaints filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) without providing Bajaj an opportunity to be heard, as required by the BNSS.

Justice Jha emphasized the legislative intent behind Section 223, highlighting the necessity of a pre-cognizance hearing to ensure fairness and compliance with natural justice. The judgment draws from the Supreme Court's interpretation in Kushal Kumar Agrawal v. Directorate of Enforcement, which clarified that such provisions apply retrospectively, reinforcing the imperative of adhering to statutory mandates from the onset.

The Court rejected the ED's arguments that the lack of a pre-cognizance hearing was a mere irregularity and that no prejudice was caused to Bajaj. Justice Jha underscored that procedural compliance is not merely a formality but a crucial element ensuring the validity of judicial proceedings.

This decision mandates the Special Court to reconsider the matter afresh, providing Bajaj with the statutory right to be heard before any cognizance is taken. The judgment reinforces the judiciary's role in upholding procedural fairness and the rule of law, particularly in cases involving serious allegations like money laundering.

The case is now remanded to the Special Judge, PMLA, Patna, for proceedings in compliance with Section 223 of the BNSS, ensuring that all statutory requirements are fulfilled.

Bottom Line:

Criminal Procedure - Section 223 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Mandatory pre-cognizance hearing for accused before Magistrate can take cognizance - Failure to provide such hearing violates principles of natural justice and statutory mandate.

Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 223, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Section 44

Pushpraj Bajaj v. Union of India, (Patna) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2806908