Delhi Court Denies Prosecution of Amanatullah Khan in Money Laundering Case Due to Missing Sanction
Last Updated on November 16, 2024 by Athi Venkatesh
A Delhi court recently declined to take cognizance of a supplementary prosecution complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Amanatullah Khan in a money laundering case. Special Judge Jitendra Singh cited the absence of mandatory government sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) as the reason for this decision. According to Section 197, any court proceeding against a public servant for actions taken in discharge of official duties requires prior approval from the competent government authority.
The court acknowledged sufficient grounds to proceed against Khan but stressed that the lack of requisite sanction rendered prosecution impossible. Since the alleged corruption charges stemmed from Khan’s role as chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board, the court emphasized that sanction was essential. “No sanction from the competent authority has been placed on record against A-6,” the court noted, resulting in a declined cognizance for the charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The court ordered Khan’s immediate release, ruling that further detention would be unlawful in the absence of prosecution approval. The case against Khan involves alleged irregularities in the Delhi Waqf Board’s hiring process and questionable property purchases made during his tenure. Initially investigated by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, the ED registered the money laundering case, leading to Khan’s arrest on September 2 after unsuccessful bail pleas in both the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court.
The court also addressed allegations against Khan’s wife, Mariyam Siddiqui. The ED accused her of knowingly aiding Khan with proceeds of crime, but the court found no supporting evidence. Declaring the complaint against her “based upon surmises and conjectures,” the court refused to summon her.
This ruling raises questions regarding procedural compliance in prosecuting public servants under corruption charges.
