Chennai: The Madras High Court has set aside an order of the Alandur Judicial Magistrate Court accepting the closure report filed by the Central Crime Branch (CCB) police in a case registered against Santiago Martin, his wife Lima Rose and three others.
The court allowed a criminal revision petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against the acceptance of the closure report by the Magistrate court.
The case was related to the seizure of Rs 7.20 crore from the residence of M. Nagarajan at Thillai Ganga Nagar in Nanganallur on March 12, 2012.
A day later, an amount of Rs 50 lakh was seized from the residence of his associate G. Moorthy.
Further investigation revealed that they, along with the lottery baron, were involved in the sale of banned lottery tickets in Chennai.
The suspects, on the other hand, claimed the seized money was the advance amount given by the lottery baron’s wife to Moorthy for purchasing a house worth Rs 12.30 crore at Anna Nagar in Chennai.
The accused also claimed to have declared the transaction in the Income Tax returns.
Pursuant to their explanation, the CCB chose to close the case and the Magistrate also accepted this and closed the case.
A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and V. Sivagangai on Monday allowed a criminal revision petition filed by the ED against the acceptance of the closure report by the Magistrate court.
Madras High court division bench also permitted the ED as well as the CCB to continue the prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) of 2002.
A.R.L. Sundaresan, Additional Solicitor General representing the ED informed the court that no accused would be allowed to go scot-free from a major economic offence.
He also said that ED was unable to probe the matter under the PMLA of 2002 as an investigating officer attached to the CCB had decided to close the case booked for the predicate offence.
A.R.L. Sundaresan also said that the ED had all the rights to request the High Court to find out whether the CCB was justified in closing the case and whether the magistrate had given a proper thought before accepting the closure report.
He said that there were enough materials to doubt that the suspects had created an ante-dated false sale agreement related to an immovable property for explaining the possession of Rs 7.20 crore in cash.
(IANS)
