Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT vs. NIRAJ TYAGI & ORS.

SCR Citation: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 311
Year/Volume: 2024/ Volume 2
Date of Judgment: 13 February 2024
Petitioner: Directorate Of Enforcement
Disposal Nature: Appeals Allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 106
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi
Respondent: Niraj Tyagi & Ors.
Case Type: CRIMINAL APPEAL /843/2024
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

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 mala fide or malicious, instituted with ulterior motive etc., the High Court could not have stayed the investigations and restrained the investigating agencies 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]

2. Case referred
3. Act
  • Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
  • Prevention Of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (0 of 2002)
4. Keyword
  • 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