Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 86360 (PNJ)

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORECEMENT, CHANDGIARH, THROUGH ASSISTANT DIRECTOR v. GANESH DUTT RATTAN

CRM-M/54272/2021 · 2025-03-26

Tribhuvan Dahiya

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-54077-2021 & other connected cases 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (201) (1) CRM-M-54077-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Pardeep Kumar ……Respondent (2) CRM-M-54091-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Nandita Hooda ……Respondent (3) CRM-M-54100-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Lt. Col. Om Parkash Dahiya (Retd.) ……Respondent (4) CRM-M-54108-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Subhash Chander Kansal ……Respondent MANINDER 2025.04.04 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-54077-2021 & other connected cases 2 (5) CRM-M-54114-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Anupam Sud ……Respondent (6) CRM-M-54121-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Pawan Kansal ……Respondent (7) CRM-M-54126-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Renu Hooda ……Respondent (8) CRM-M-54134-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Ashok Verma ……Respondent (9) CRM-M-54139-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Kanwar Preet Singh Sandhu ……Respondent MANINDER 2025.04.04 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-54077-2021 & other connected cases 3 (10) CRM-M-54142-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Surjit Singh ……Respondent (11) CRM-M-54184-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Manjot Kaur ……Respondent (12) CRM-M-54192-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Mona Beri ……Respondent (13) CRM-M-54197-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Narinder Kumar Solanki ……Respondent (14) CRM-M-54204-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Dharam Pal Singh Nagal ……Respondent MANINDER 2025.04.04 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-54077-2021 & other connected cases 4 (15) CRM-M-54210-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Aman Gupta ……Respondent (16) CRM-M-54216-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Bharat Bhushan Taneja ……Respondent (17) CRM-M-54220-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Bhupender Singh Hooda ……Respondent (18) CRM-M-54272-2021 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh ……Petitioner Versus Ganesh Dutt Rattan ……Respondent Decided on : 26.03.2025 CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- Mr.S.V.Raju, Addl.Solicitor General of India (through Video Conferencing) with Mr. Arvind Moudgil, Senior Panel Counsel, Union of India (through Video Conferencing) with Ms. Isha Bhukal, Mr.Gaurav Sarkar, Advocates, for the petitioner/ED. MANINDER 2025.04.04 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-54077-2021 & other connected cases 5 Ms.Bhavya Vats, Mr.Yashvardhan Goyal, Advocates, for Mr. Akshay Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-54114-2021. Mr. R.S.Cheema, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Pardeep Singh Poonia, Mr. Pulkit Dhanda, Mr. Mukul Malik, Mr. Dharam Pal Saini, Advocates, for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54077, 54091, 54126 & 54220-2021. Mr. Rishab Tewari, Advocate for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54100-2021. Mr. Abhishek Singh Rana & Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocates, and Mr. Aadeyant Parmar, Advocate for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54134-2021. Mr. K.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate, and Mr. Vicky Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54139-2021. Ms. Sumanjit Kaur, Mr.Satish Sharma, Advocates for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54142-2021. Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arnav Ghai, Mr. R.S. Bagga, Ms. Kashish Sahni, Advocates, for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54184-2021. Mr. Kunal Garg, Advocate for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54210-2021. Ms. Niharika Mittal, Advocate for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54197-2021. Mr. R.P. Daaria, Advocate, and Mr. Tarun, Advocate for the respondent(s)in CRM-M-54216-2021. Mr. Parvez Chugh, Advocate Mr. Anjaneya Mishra, Advocate (through Video Conferencing) Mr. Himanshu Setia, Advocate for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54121-2021. Mr. Arjun Sheoran, Advocate with Mr.Tejasvi Sheokand, Advocate, for the respondents in CRM-M-54108-2021. Mr. Vineet Sehgal, Advocate, for the respondent(s) in CRM-M-54192-2021. Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent(s) in CRM-54272-2021. Mr. Saurav Kapoor, Advocate, for the respondent(s) in CRM-54204-2021. MANINDER 2025.04.04 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-54077-2021 & other connected cases 6 TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) These petitions have been filed for cancellation of a common order dated 15.03.2021, Annexure P-1, passed by Special Judge under PMLA (Haryana), Panchkula, in complaint case no.COMA/3/2021 dated 15.02.2021, registered under Sections 44 and 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, ‘the PMLA’) whereby the respondents/accused were granted bail as they had not been arrested during the course of investigation by invoking Section 19 of the PMLA, nor had they been produced in custody by the Enforcement Directorate. The statutory complaint had been filed against the respondents without arresting them. 2. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India and senior panel counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly contend that in view of the law settled in Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office, (2024) 7 SCC 61, the respondents’ entitlement to bail cannot be disputed. 3. In view thereof, the petitions stand dismissed. 4. Photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) March 26, 2025 JUDGE Sailesh/Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No MANINDER 2025.04.04 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.