Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 · Chapter VII: Special Courts
Section 44: Offences triable by Special Courts
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),—
[(a) an offence punishable under section 4 and any scheduled offence connected to the offence under that section shall be triable by the Special Court constituted for the area in which the offence has been committed:
Provided that the Special Court, trying a scheduled offence before the commencement of this Act, shall continue to try such scheduled offence; or];
(b) a Special Court may, *** upon a complaint made by an authority authorised in this behalf under this Act take [cognizance of offence under section 3, without the accused being committed to it for trial];
[(c) if the court which has taken cognizance of the scheduled offence is other than the Special Court which has taken cognizance of the complaint of the offence of money-laundering under sub-clause (b), it shall, on an application by the authority authorised to file a complaint under this Act, commit the case relating to the scheduled offence to the Special Court and the Special Court shall, on receipt of such case proceed to deal with it from the stage at which it is committed.
(d) a Special Court while trying the scheduled offence or the offence of money-laundering shall hold trial in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( 2 of 1974) as it applies to a trial before a Court of Session.]
[Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is clarified that,—
(i) the jurisdiction of the Special Court while dealing with the offence under this Act, during investigation, enquiry or trial under this Act, shall not be dependent upon any orders passed in respect of the scheduled offence, and the trial of both sets of offences by the same court shall not be construed as joint trial;
(ii) the complaint shall be deemed to include any subsequent complaint in respect of further investigation that may be conducted to bring any further evidence, oral or documentary, against any accused person involved in respect of the offence, for which complaint has already been filed, whether named in the original complaint or not.]
(2) Nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to affect the special powers of the High Court regarding bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) and the High Court may exercise such powers including the power under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of that section as if the reference to "Magistrate" in that section includes also a reference to a Special Court designated under section 43.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 14 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 44
-
Kushal Kumar Agarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement
An opportunity of being heard was not given by the Special Judge to the appellant-accused before taking cognizance of the offence on the complaint. Whether opportunity of being heard is required in terms of the proviso…
-
Partha Chatterjee v. Directorate of Enforcement
Matter pertains to grant of bail to the appellant-former State Education Minister and MLA, in the ED case for his involvement in various investigations, owing to the racket of illegal appointment of teachers.
-
Directorate of Enforcement v. Bibhu Prasad Acharya, etc.
The appellant filed complaints against the respondents and others u/s.44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Special Court took cognizance of the complaints and issued summons to the respondents…
-
V. Senthil Balaji v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Matter pertains to grant of bail to former Tamil Nadu transport minister against whom complaint was filed for offence u/s.3 PMLA, which is punishable u/s.4 PMLA for his alleged involvement in the job racket scam.
-
Parvinder Singh Khurana v. Directorate of Enforcement
The issue involved in these appeals concerns the power of the High Court or Sessions Court to grant an interim order of stay of operation of an order granting bail till the disposal of the application for cancellation…
-
Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office
(a) Whether the complaint filed u/s.44(1)(b) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 will be governed by sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC; (b) If the accused was not arrested by the ED till the filing of the…
-
Yash Tuteja & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors
The issue for consideration was a challenge to the Complaint filed by the Directorate of Enforcement under Section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, mainly on the ground that apart from s. 120B…
-
Tarun Kumar v. Assistant Director Directorate
Appellant was arrested on the fourth supplementary complaint filed u/ss.44, 45, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, in continuation of three complaints in the Complaint Case, for the commission of the offence of…
- V. Senthil Balaji v. The State Represented by
- Sanjay Raghunath Agarwal v. The Directorate of
- Rana Ayyub v. Directorate of Enforcement
- Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
- J. Sekar @Sekar Reddy v. Directorate of Enforcement
- Gautam Kundu v. Manoj Kumar Assistant Director, Eastern Region, Directorate of Enforcement(Prevention of Money Laundering Act) Govt. of India