LexDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT versus NIRAJ TYAGI & ORS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 2 S.C.R. 311 : 2024 INSC 106 Directorate of Enforcement v. Niraj Tyagi & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024) 13 February 2024 [Bela M. Trivedi* And Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Interim orders passed by the High Court staying the investigations of the FIRs and the Enforcement Directorate, if justified. Headnotes Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 482 – Powers of the High Court under – Banking financial institution sanctioned loan facilities to the borrowers, however, the borrowers defaulted – Banking institution auctioned the property and sold the shares of the borrowers for the recovery of its dues – Registration of FIR by the borrowers against the Banking institution and its officers, and investigation by the Enforcement Directorate – Writ petition before the High Court by the officers seeking quashing of FIR and as also consequential proceedings arising therefrom – Orders passed by the High Court staying the investigations of the FIRs and ECIR and restrained the investigating agencies from investigating into the cognizable offences as alleged in the FIRs and the ECIR – Propriety: Held: Inherent powers u/s. 482 do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whims or caprice – Statutory power has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases – Said order passed in utter disregard of the settled legal position – Without undermining the powers of the High Court u/s. 482 to quash the proceedings if the allegations made in the FIR or complaint prima facie do not constitute any offence against the accused, or if the criminal proceedings are found to be manifestly malafide or malicious, instituted with ulterior motive etc., the High Court could not have stayed the investigations and restrained the investigating agencies 312 [2024] 2 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports from investigating into the cognizable offences as alleged in the FIRs and the ECIR, particularly when the investigations were at a very nascent stage – In a way, by passing such orders of staying the investigations and restraining the investigating agencies from taking any coercive measure against the accused pending the petitions u/s. 482, the High Court granted blanket orders restraining the arrest without the accused applying for the anticipatory bail – Thus, the impugned orders passed by the High Court being not in consonance with the legal position, set aside – Impugned interim orders passed by the High Court qua the accused stands vacated. [Paras 20, 23-25] Judicial discipline – Principle of: Held: Judicial discipline and Judicial comity and demands that higher courts should follow the law – Extraordinary and inherent powers of the court do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whims and caprice. [Paras 24, 25] Case Law Cited Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, [2021] 4 SCR 1044 : (2021) SCC Online SC 315 – relied on. K. Virupaksha and Another vs. State of Karnataka and Another, [2020] 2 SCR 1020 : (2020) 4 SCC 440; A.P. Mahesh Cooperative Urban Bank Shareholders Welfare Association vs. Ramesh Kumar Bung and Others, [2021] 6 SCR 850 : (2021) 9 SCC 152; State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and Others, [2017] 1 SCR 141 : 2017 (2) SCC 779 – referred to. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. List of Keywords Quashing of FIR; Staying the investigations; Powers of the High Court; Malafide or malicious criminal proceedings; Investigating agencies; Enforcement Directorate; Inherent powers; Judicial comity; Judicial discipline; Extraordinary powers; Money laundering. [2024] 2 S.C.R. 313 Directorate of Enforcement v. Niraj Tyagi & Ors. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.843 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 13.07.2023 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in CRMWP No.10893 of 2023 With Criminal Appeal Nos. 844 And 845 of 2024 Appearances for Parties S.V. Raju, ASG, Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv., Udai Khanna, Rudra Pratap, Talha Abdul Rahman, M Shaz Khan, Tushar Randhawa, Rahul Sharma, Nandini Singh, Adnan Yousuf, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advs. for the Appellant. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Sr. Adv./A.A.G, Ranjit Kumar, Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Advs., Mahesh Agarwal, Rishi Agrawala, Ankur Saigal, Mr. Ankit Banati, Kajal Dalal, E.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.