Parvinder Singh v Directorate of Enforcement

Background

Background

In Parvinder Singh v Directorate of Enforcement (2026 INSC 519), India's Supreme Court set aside cognizance taken after 1 July 2024 without hearing the accused, although the PMLA complaint had been filed earlier.

The Enforcement Directorate filed its PMLA complaint on 24 June 2024. Before the BNSS commenced on 1 July, the Special Court only registered and listed it. The court took cognizance on 2 July without first hearing the accused.

Legal questions

Legal questions

Whether a PMLA complaint filed before 1 July 2024, but taken cognizance of after BNSS commenced, required an opportunity of hearing for the accused under the first proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS.

Court holding

What the Court decided

Numbering and listing the complaint before 1 July was a ministerial act, not a pending judicial inquiry saved under Section 531(2)(a). The mandatory hearing under Section 223(1) applied when cognizance was taken on 2 July; its omission vitiated that order.

Final outcome

Final outcome

Appeal allowed. The High Court judgment and Special Court's cognizance order were set aside. The Special Court was directed to hear the accused and proceed afresh from cognizance within eight weeks of receiving the judgment.

Practical effect

What the decision means in practice

The Special Court must hear the accused and reconsider cognizance within eight weeks of receiving the judgment. The prosecution complaint remains to be dealt with according to law.

This summary states the immediate effect recorded in the decision. The original judgment and the facts of the particular case remain controlling.

Key legal principles

Key legal principles

• Merely numbering a complaint and listing it for cognizance is a ministerial step, not a pending judicial inquiry saved by Section 531(2)(a) BNSS.
• The first proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS requires an opportunity of hearing before cognizance of a complaint; on these facts, omission vitiated the order.
• Complaint-stage criminal procedure applies to PMLA Special Court proceedings insofar as it is not inconsistent with the PMLA.
• Setting aside cognizance returns the case for a lawful decision; it is not an acquittal or a ruling on the alleged offence.

Pakistan relevance

Pakistan relevance

This is an Indian statutory ruling on the BNSS and PMLA; it does not directly decide procedure under Pakistan's criminal or anti-money-laundering laws.