BNSS Section 223(1) Proviso Gives PMLA Accused Statutory Right to Relied-Upon Documents Pre-Cognizance: Madras HC (2026:MHC:4462)
Court category: High Court
Court / details: Madras High Court (Madurai Bench)
Location: Madurai / Tamil Nadu
In R. Anandha Ramakrishnan v. The Assistant Director, ED (2026:MHC:4462), the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court held that under the first proviso to Section 223(1) of BNSS, an accused in a PMLA complaint has a statutory right to receive relied-upon documents at the pre-cognizance stage.
CASE DETAILS AT A GLANCE
Case Title: R. Anandha Ramakrishnan v. The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Court Name: Madras High Court (Madurai Bench)
Coram / Judges: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abdul Quddhose and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajnish Pathiyil
Case Number: Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 21716 of 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:MHC:4462
Order Date: 05.11.2026 (November 5, 2026)
1. Executive Summary
Interpreting the pre-cognizance hearing safeguard introduced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, a Division Bench of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court in R. Anandha Ramakrishnan v. The Assistant Director (2026:MHC:4462) quashed an order of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai, and held that an accused in a Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) complaint is statutorily entitled to receive copies of all relied-upon prosecution documents before cognizance is taken.
2. Statutory Analysis: Section 223(1) BNSS & Scope of Hearing
The trial court had rejected the petitioner's application in Crl.M.P. No. 3212 of 2026 by relying on Sarla Gupta. Reversing that view, the Division Bench clarified that Sarla Gupta never barred furnishing relied-upon documents at the pre-cognizance stage under the new BNSS framework, and endorsed the Allahabad High Court's view in Supreme Technofabs Pvt. Ltd. v. Directorate of Enforcement.
At the same time, the Bench delineated the precise scope of the pre-cognizance hearing under the first proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS:
- Meaningful Right of Hearing: For the statutory right to be heard before taking cognizance to be meaningful rather than illusory, the proposed accused must have access to the complaint and the documents relied upon by the Enforcement Directorate.
- No Evaluation of Defence or Merits: Relying on Sonu Gupta v. Deepak Gupta [(2015) 3 SCC 424], the Court clarified that while BNSS adds a right of hearing, the Special Court at the cognizance stage must confine itself strictly to whether the complaint and relied-upon documents disclose a prima facie offence under Section 3 of PMLA, without evaluating defence materials or conducting a mini-trial.
3. Operative Direction
The High Court quashed the impugned order dated August 31, 2026, and directed the Directorate of Enforcement to furnish copies of all relied-upon documents to the petitioner within four weeks.
Citation: Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) order in Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 21716 of 2026 (2026:MHC:4462). For criminal defence and PMLA/BNSS advisory, visit https://sklawhouse.com/practice or https://sklawhouse.com/contact-us.