Delhi HC upholds accused's right to be heard before cognizance of chargesheet

New Delhi [India], August 14 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Wednesday upheld the accused's right to be heard by the trial court before it takes cognizance of a chargesheet. The order came on pleas filed by Lakshay Vij and nine other accused in a money laundering case.
Justice Ravinder Dudeja allowed 10 petitions seeking enforcement of the right to be heard before cognizance.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had also upheld the provision under Section 223 BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita), 2023.
While deciding the petition of Kushal Kumar Agarwal on May 9, 2025, the Supreme Court had said, "We direct the appellant to appear before the Special Court on 14th July, 2025, so that he can be given an opportunity of being heard in terms of the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 223 of the BNSS. We make it clear that no further notice shall be issued by the Special Court to the appellant."
Under Section 223 of BNSS, it is provided that the accused is to be heard by the trial court before taking cognizance of the charge sheet filed against him.
On January 17, 2025, Vij had challenged an order passed by the trial court rejecting his plea seeking the opportunity to be heard on the point of cognizance in terms of the proviso to Section 223, BNSS, 2023.
He had challenged the order of January 4, 2025, passed by the special judge at Rouse Avenue Courts. ED had filed a Prosecution Complaint (Charge sheet) against Vij.
Senior advocate Vikas Pahwa and advocate Prabhav Ralli appeared for Lakshay Vij.
It was submitted by the counsel that after filing of the Prosecution Complaint on 19.09.2024, Vij had filed an application seeking the opportunity to be heard on the point of cognizance in terms of the proviso to Sec 223, BNSS, 2023. The same was rejected by the court.
It was also submitted that, as per provisions of Sec 223, BNSS, 2023, to PMLA, 2002, it is the sacrosanct right of the accused, in cases instituted upon a complaint, to be heard at the time of cognizance.
The Enforcement Directorate had registered a case in the matter on the basis of an FIR registered by the CBI.
The plea had mentioned that the Central Bureau of Investigation, International Operations Division, registered on 04.07.2023 for commission of alleged offences under 120-B read with 419 and 420 of IPC. It is pertinent to mention that the Applicant was not named in the aforesaid FIR.
It is also mentioned that the ED had recorded an ECIR on 04.12.2023 under sections 3 & 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Petitioner was arrested by the ED on 22.07.2024, and the Prosecution Complaint was filed on 19.09.2024.
It was submitted that on 04.01.2025, the Trial Court rejected the plea of the Petitioner while holding that the proviso to Sec 223, BNSS, 2023 would not apply to a Complaint under the PMLA, 2002, and proceeded to list the matter for arguments on cognizance from the side of the prosecution on 18.01.2025. (ANI)