- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- with Finance and Tax Executives
- in Australia
- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
By
Rajat Jain, Advocate
Vaish Associates Advocates
Email id:rajatjain@vaishlaw.com
Mobile No. 9953887311
LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/in/rajat-jain-75772398/
In Sachin Dev Duggal v. Directorate of Enforcement (2025:DHC:11624), the Delhi High Court set aside non-bailable warrants (NBWs) issued against UK-based businessman Sachin Dev Duggal in proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).
In the case, the ED had issued summons to the petitioner under Section 50 of the PMLA in connection with an ongoing money laundering investigation. At the relevant stage, the petitioner was summoned in the capacity of a witness. Alleging non-compliance and contending that the petitioner was not cooperating with the investigation and would not appear unless compelled by law, the ED approached the Special Court seeking issuance of non-bailable warrants. The Special Court accordingly issued NBWs against the petitioner.
Notably, no prosecution complaint had been filed against the petitioner before the Special Court. Although the ED described him as a suspect, the application did not state that he was an accused at that stage.
Challenging the warrants, the petitioner argued that he was residing abroad and that the summons had not been duly served in accordance with the prescribed procedure. It was further contended that the issuance of NBWs was a mechanical exercise of power, without satisfaction of the statutory requirements.
The High Court held that the power under Section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) cannot be exercised mechanically. Before issuing non-bailable warrants under Section 73, the court must record satisfaction that the person against whom the warrants are sought falls within one of the recognised categories namely, a convict, a proclaimed offender, or a person accused of a non-bailable offence who is evading arrest. Mere non-appearance in response to summons does not automatically justify the issuance of NBWs.
The Court also examined the statutory scheme under Section 50 PMLA. It noted that proceedings under Section 50 are deemed judicial proceedings, and the statute itself provides consequences for failure to attend or give evidence. Such non-compliance may attract penal provisions under the Indian Penal Code relating to non-attendance in obedience to summons issued by a public servant.
Importantly, the Court clarified that while non-bailable warrants can, in appropriate circumstances, be issued even against a person not formally arrayed as an accused in a prosecution complaint, such person must be shown to be accused of a non-bailable offence and evading arrest for the purposes of Section 73 CrPC. In the present case, however, the petitioner had been described as a "witness," and there was no material demonstrating that he satisfied the statutory conditions.
The High Court found that the impugned order did not reflect adequate judicial scrutiny of these requirements. It held that the statutory framework under Section 50 PMLA cannot be bypassed, and coercive custody cannot become the first response to non-appearance.
Accordingly, concluding that the issuance of NBWs was not in accordance with law, the High Court set aside the warrants.
In essence, the judgment clarifies that Section 73 CrPC applies to PMLA proceedings, but warrants cannot be issued mechanically; and non-compliance with summons under Section 50 PMLA carries specific statutory consequences, which must be addressed within the framework of law rather than through immediate recourse to non-bailable warrants.
© 2025, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy
Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.
