The Supreme Court today admitted the plea of lottery baron Santiago Martin against the Special Court’s order refusing to defer his trial in a money laundering case until the disposal of the predicate case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, while issuing notice, has also stayed the trial and has sought the response of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the present appeal. The trial is pending before the Special PMLA Court at Ernakulam, Kerala.
Santiago Martin was an accused in the case filed by the CBI, Cochin. On the same grounds, the ED filed a complaint implicating seven accused persons, including Martin, in a PMLA Case. Subsequently, the petitioner lodged an application seeking to keep in abeyance the PMLA case till the final disposal of the predicate matter, the case registered by the CBI.
Nonetheless, the Special Court rejected the same and stated that the two cases were independent and separate. It is against this order that the petitioner has now approached the Supreme Court.
In the plea, the petitioner raised a significant question about the law. It mentioned that in the sequence of the trial between the predicate offence and the PMLA case, which case should take precedence?
The petitioner had also relied upon the precedent of VijayMandanlal Choudhary vs Union of India & Ors. In the aforementioned case, the Court had observed that if a person was discharged or acquitted in the scheduled/predicate case, the proceedings under PMLA could not be continued.
The Supreme Court judgment in Pavana Dibbur v. Directorate of Enforcement was also cited, where the Court had clarified that a person accused of an offence under Section 3 of the PMLA need not necessarily be shown as an accused in the scheduled offence.
Owing to this, the petitioner, in his petition, has averred that the trial of the predicate case is to be conducted first. Hence, the present trial in the money laundering case should be kept abeyance during the pendency of the predicate case.
The petition added that the application for discharge in the predicate case filed by the petitioner is pending consideration. Notably, one of the reasons cited by the petitioner for approaching the Supreme Court is the pendency of the matter in M/s. BhartiCement Corporation Private Limited v. Directorate of Enforcement. In the matter, the Telangana High Court had held that the proceedings in the PMLA case should await the outcome of the alleged predicate case. The same is pending for consideration before the Supreme Court. Given that the issue is the same as the one raised in the present plea, the petitioner has approached the top court.
Notably, Santiago Martin is the biggest electoral bonds donor.