WP Crl./858/2026 of R.Girirajan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its, Secretaty to Government,

W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20.04.2026 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN W.P. ( Crl .)No .858 of 2026 R.Girirajan, S/o.Late C.Radhakrishnan, No.367, Anna Arivalayam, 369, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018. .. Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its, Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The Director, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), No.293, MKN Road, Ramapuram, Collectors Nagar, Alandur, Chennai - 600 016. 3.The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu Police, Chennai - 600 004. 4.Director of Enforcement, Rep. by its Assistant Director, Shastri Bhavan, 3rd Floor, 3rd Block, B-Wing, No.26, Haddows Road, Chennai - 600 006. ______________ Page 1 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 5.K.P.Anbalagan, Formerly Minister for the Higher Education Department, Residing at No.1/136A, Keragodahalli (Village and Post), Karimangalam Taluk, Dharmapuri - 635 111. .. Respondent(s) PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of I ndia seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 4 th respondent to register an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) un der the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the 5 th respondent and conduct a thorough investigation into the proceeds of crime generated through acts of corruption, bribery and acc umulation of disproportionate assets, and to take appropriate action in accordance with law. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.N.R.Elango Senior Counsel for Mr.G.Prabhakaran For Respondent(s) : Mrs.E.Ranganayaki Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor for R2 & R3 Mr.N.Ramesh Special Public Prosecutor (ED) for R4 ______________ Page 2 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) The writ petition is filed seeking for a direction, to dir ect the 4 th respondent/Enforcement Directorate to register an Enforc ement Case Information Report [ECIR] under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [hereinafter referred to as “the PML Act”] a gainst the 5 th respondent. 2. The petitioner is a practising advocate and a sitting m ember of the Parliament (Rajya Sabha) from the ruling party of the State. The 5th respondent is from the opposition party, who was a former Minister. 3. According to the petitioner, the 5 th respondent, during his tenure as Minister, by abusing his official position, had indulged in corruption and committed serious irregularities in the co ncerned department. Based on a complaint that the 5 th respondent accumulated assets disproportionate to his known source of income, an FIR was registered by the 2 nd respondent/Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption in Crime No.03/AC/2022, for offences under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e), 13(1)(b), Section 12 of the Prevent ion of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 109 of IPC. ______________ Page 3 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 4. It is further stated that since the illegal gains generated through the aforesaid offences primarily constitute pro ceeds of crime as defined under Section 2(1)(u) of the PML Act and as t he case has been registered for the scheduled offence under the PM L Act, the Enforcement Directorate [ED] is empowered to register an ECIR and investigate the case. However, the failure on the part of the ED to register the ECIR purely on political consideration is unju stified and hence, the petitioner had preferred this writ petition se eking for a direction to register the ECIR by the ED. 5. Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, mainly by placing reliance on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Balaji v. Karthik Desari reported in (2024) 19 SCC 625, contended that once illegal gratification is acquired by a public servant, it would represent proceed s of crime, generated through a criminal activity in respect of a scheduled offence, which is an act of money laundering and no fishing expedit ion is required and the ED ought to have registered the ECIR. ______________ Page 4 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 6. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that when the predicate offence has been registered for scheduled offences, particularly under the Prevention of Corruption Act as against the former Minister, the ED had not registered the ECIR and proceeded with the investigation, thereby failing to discharge their lawful duties. The ED cannot choose to register the case based on p olitical considerations and the 4 th respondent is bound to register the ECIR and proceed with the investigation to unearth the proceeds of crime. 7. Per contra, Mr.N.Ramesh, learned Special Public Prosec utor (ED) taking notice for the 4th respondent, contended that it is a politically motivated case, in as much as the petitioner fr om the ruling party, seeks for registration of a case against the me mber of opposition party. He further submitted that the petition er is a third party, who is neither a complainant nor in any way conne cted with the scheduled offence, and he has no locus standi to file the present writ petition. The writ petition is also not a public interest lit igation and the petitioner had not even made any representation in this regard and therefore only in view of the ensuing election, the peti tion is filed for political mileage. ______________ Page 5 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 8. The learned counsel further submitted that, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India reported in (2023) 12 SCC 1, ECIR is an internal document and even in respect of any proce edings undertaken by the ED, it cannot be disclosed as it would impinge on the privacy of the person concerned. He further subm itted that in fact in one of the cases filed by the petitioner, the ED sou ght for copies from the Special Court, but however, the State had o pposed for the copies to be furnished and that being the position, the relief sought for cannot be sustained. Learned counsel further submitt ed that the writ petition seeking for a direction to the ED to register an ECIR is not maintainable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supr eme Court in the case of R.Madhavan Pillai v. Rajendran Unnithan.S reported in MANU/SCOR/24144/2025. 9. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petition er, in reply, repelled the submissions regarding locus by placing reliance on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.Anbazhagan v. Superintendent of Police reported in (2004) 3 SCC 767 , and contended that even a politically motivated case is not a bar and the case could be considered on merits. The learned Senior C ounsel also ______________ Page 6 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 sought to distinguish the decision in the case of R.Madhavan Pillai (supra) by contending that, as the direction was issue d by the High Court to register ECIR against the persons in the abse nce of them being arrayed as accused in the predicate case, the o rder was set aside by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, but however in the present case, the 5th respondent is already an accused in the scheduled offence. 10. Heard the rival submissions and considered the mate rials available on record. 11. The petitioner, a Member of the Parliament in Rajy a Sabha, seeks for a direction to the ED to register an ECIR unde r the PML Act as against the 5 th respondent, on the ground that a predicate case in Crime No.03/AC/2022, for offences under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e), 13(1)(b), Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1 988 and Section 109 of IPC has been registered against him by t he Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption/2 nd respondent, which are scheduled offences. 12. The issue that arises for consideration is as to wheth er the ED could be directed to register ECIR under the PML Act. ______________ Page 7 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 13. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act is a Special A ct enacted to prevent money laundering and to provide fo r the confiscation of property derived from or involved in mo ney laundering. Section 3 of the PML Act deals with the offence of money laundering, which reads as follows; “3. Offence of money laundering .-Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process o r activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of offe nce of money-laundering. Explanation.--For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that,-- (i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money- laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely:-- (a) concealment; or ______________ Page 8 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.” 14. Section 4 deals with the punishment for money launder ing. As per the scheme of the PML Act, when a case is regis tered for the scheduled offences, which are contained in the schedule as defined under Section 2(1)(y) of the Act, the authorised officer can register an ECIR based on the predicate offence and conduct an investigation. The procedures and powers for survey, search, seizure and arrest are prescribed in Chapter-V of the Act. Under every Section authorising for survey, search, seizure, or arrest, authorised officer on the basis of materials in his possession, based on the reasons to belie ve, which is ______________ Page 9 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 recorded in writing, that an offence has been committed under Section 3, would proceed under various Sections in this Chapter. 15. Further, as per Section 5 under Chapter-III, th e authorised officer can attach the property involved in money launde ring based on the reasons to believe recorded in writing on the basis o f materials in his possession and file necessary application before the a djudicating authority for retention of the seized property and for confirming the attachment. 16. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra) held that the ECIR is an internal document. ECIR is registered, based on existence of predicate case for scheduled offences and the prima facie satisfaction of the author ised officer from materials in his possession. The authorised officer would then be entitled to proceed further under the PML Act. However at every stage, the authorised officer has to record the reasons to b elieve in writing, based on the materials in his possession to take appro priate further proceedings. ______________ Page 10 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 17. Sections 62 and 63 under Chapter-X deal with the punishment for conducting vexatious search and punishme nt for false information or failure to give information, etc. 18. As per Section 44 of the PML Act, only a Special Co urt shall be competent to take cognizance of the offence under Section 3, based upon a complaint made by the authorised officer under the PML Act. 19. The Act does not contemplate that wherever the ca se is registered invoking scheduled offences, the ED is mandated to register an ECIR under the Act. It is only based on the satisfac tion of the authorised officer that there are proceeds of crime, the authority would proceed further under the Act. 20. It is the vehement contention of the learned Senior Counsel that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Cou rt in the case of Balaji (supra), the ED is bound to register the case. The decis ion in Balaji’s case arose challenging various decisions of this Court, o ne of which put on hold an investigation by the ED. In that cas e, already based on the predicate offence, the ED had registered an ECIR where the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that once an information relating to ______________ Page 11 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 the acquisition of huge amount of illegal gratification has come into public domain, it is the duty of the ED to register an I nformation Report. It does not require a fishing expedition to say that the receipt of bribe money is an act of money laundering. In the aforesaid decision, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has not directed the ED to register an ECIR but only upheld the ECIR registered by the ED and held that the authorised officer was right in registering the case based on the predicate offence. 21. In the instant case, the petitioner seeks to regist er an ECIR by the ED based on the predicate offence. As per the provisions and scheme of the PML Act, the authorised officer, based o n the predicate case for scheduled offences, can resort to proceedin gs under the PML Act based on his satisfaction of the involvement of proce eds of crime and every stage is to be proceeded based on the reas ons to believe recorded in writing from the materials in his possession. 22. In this regard, it is useful to refer to the decis ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of R.Madhavan Pillai (supra), where the Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside the order of the High Court, which directed the ED to register an ECIR, where the High Court ______________ Page 12 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 prima facie came to the conclusion that there exists a predicate offence. The relevant portion is reproduced hereunder; “5. According to us, the High Court had no reason to pass a drastic order of directing the Enforcement Direc torate to register an ECIR only because the High Court prima f acie came to a conclusion that a predicate offence exists. Therefore, we set aside that part of the impugned ju dgment by which a direction is issued to the Enforcement Direc torate to register an ECIR. Therefore, the ECIR registered on the basis of the impugned judgment is hereby quashed and s et aside. We leave it to the Enforcement Directorate to tak e a call on the question of initiating proceedings under the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002.” 23. In view of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble S upreme Court, this Court cannot direct the ED to register th e ECIR merely on the finding that there exists a predicate offence. 24. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner only sou ght to distinguish the judgment in R.Madhavan Pillai (supra) contending that based on the predicate offence already an ECIR w as registered against the Secretary of that society, but since the ECIR was not registered against the other persons involved, which was found to be an irregularity, the High Court had therefore directed r egistration of ______________ Page 13 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 ECIR. However, since no predicate offence was registered against those persons, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had interven ed and set aside the order, as the ECIR cannot be registered witho ut a predicate offence. 25. However, we are unable to accept such a contenti on, since after setting aside the order impugned, the Hon’ble Su preme Court had ultimately left it to the ED to take a call on the que stion of initiating proceedings under the PML Act, which gives no room of doubt that the order of the High Court was set aside only f or the reason that the High Court ought not to have directed the ED to re gister an ECIR merely because of the existence of a predicate offence , as it is within the realm of the ED to register an ECIR based on their satisfaction. 26. The registration of FIR in a predicate offence does n ot ipso facto mandate the ED to register an ECIR, but it is only based on the satisfaction of the authorised officer from the predicat e case and the materials available. This Court cannot substitute the satisfaction of ED, which is to be arrived at from the materials available, in a ccordance with the PML Act. ______________ Page 14 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 27. In view of the above deliberations, the relief as sou ght for in the writ petition cannot be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, we make it clear that it is for the ED to decide in respect of initiating any proceedings under the PML Act on the basis of materials available and we express no opinion. There shall be no order as to costs. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J) 20.04.2026 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No sri To: 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its, Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The Director, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), No.293, MKN Road, Ramapuram, Collectors Nagar, Alandur, Chennai - 600 016. 3.The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu Police, Chennai - 600 004. 4.Director of Enforcement, Rep. by its Assistant Director, Shastri Bhavan, 3rd Floor, 3rd Block, B-Wing, No.26, Haddows Road, Chennai - 600 006. ______________ Page 15 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.)No.858 of 2026 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J. sri W.P.(Crl .)No .858 of 2026 20.04.2026 [2/9] ______________ Page 16 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis