ED must mention details of predicate offence in PMLA summons: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) must at least mention details of the predicate office in its summons under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) [Ankur Aggarwal v Directorate of Enforcement]..Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan directed the ED to ignore a summons issued to a person last month and consider sending a fresh one to enable him to appear before the competent authority with all relevant documents“I am of the considered opinion that if the competent authority/ Enforcement Directorate issues a summon under Section 50 of the Act seeking presence/ appearance of the presence concerned, at least some sort of reference/ detail of the predicate offence/ case must have been indicated so that the person concerned could appear before the authority concerned with complete detail,” the Court said..The order was passed in the case related to one Ankur Aggarwal who was summoned by the ED last month. The Court was told that Aggarwal had been summoned without there being any predicate offence.The counsel representing Aggarwal further submitted that he may have been summoned in connection with a complaint case of UP Pollution Control Board in which a closure report had already been filed.The Court was told that Aggarwal would have participated in the investigation but he does not know why he has been summoned under Section 50 of the PMLA..The counsel representing the ED submitted that if any summons has been issued to Aggarwal, some investigation would be ongoing. He further sought time to answer why specific reference had not been made in the summons.However, the Court declined to enter into the merits of the matter and disposed of the application with a liberty to the ED to issue fresh summons to Aggarwal with details of the predicate offence..It also ordered that if Aggarwal appears before the agency pursuant to the summons, he may not be arrested.“The applicant shall appear before the competent authority on the date fixed and shall co-operate in the investigation, if any, but he may not be arrested after his appearance before the competent authority/ Enforcement Directorate. It is made clear that if the applicant does not appear pursuant to fresh summon, the benefit of this order would not be given to him.”However, the Court clarified that it would be up to the ED to issue the fresh summons, if there is any material or evidence against Aggarwal in any predicate offence.“It is needless to say that the present applicant may take all legal pleas and grounds at appropriate stage before the competent authority or the court concerned,” the Court further said..Advocate Nadeem Murtaza represented the petitioner.Advocate Shiv P Shukla represented the ED.[Read Judgment]