POLICE v RAWAT DAWOOD AJUM

2015 PL3 49

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF PORT LOUIS (DIVISION III)

Ca!" N#$"%& '4'2015

I* +," #a++"% -.&

POLICE v DAWOOD AJUM RAWAT

R/*

The accused is charged under one count of a provisional information with having between

September 2011 to date, criminally, knowingly, wilfully, unlawfully engaged in various

transactions that involve property which in part, directly, or indirectly represent the proceeds of

crime, in breach of Sections 3(1(a and ! (1(a of the "inancial #ntelligence and $nti%&oney

'aundering $ct 2002

The evidence adduced by the prosecution found in the testimony of )# *eagoo of the ))#+ in

case cause no -../ 201. is to the effect that the accused has left &auritius for the nited

ingdom on 11 &arch 201. and his probable date of return is unknown as per the memo from

the assport and #mmigration ffice (+oc $ produced The presence of the accused is re4uired

for en4uiry and in that respect three provisional charges, namely conspiracy, money laundering,

and fraudulent use of company property have been lodged

The rosecutor moved this )ourt to issue a warrant of arrest against the accused

The motion of the prosecution is not granted for the following reasons5

(1) The concept of 6provisional information7 is very peculiar and uni4ue to the &auritian

conte8t and its distinctive features are that it is fundamentally a process to bring a

suspect before )ourt1  There is no statutory provision regarding the lodging of a

provisional information and such an information is lodged when a suspect is arrested or

is brought into custody The purpose of a provisional charge is to 6 bring the detention of

1 Ȁ M--+--!a# v T," ""* 191 SCJ 4326

 

the individual under judicial supervision and control so as to prevent an administrative

detention and to enable a judicial authority to decide whether the detainee should be

released on bail or not and, if not, for how long he should be detained…. 2

(2) The lodging of a provisional charge is the mechanism which e8ists to give effect to the

provision of Section . of the )onstitution, which re4uires the prosecuting authorities to

bring a person arrested on reasonable suspicion of having committed a serious criminal

offence before a &agistrate within the least possible delay, and to inform the court of the

reason of the arrest of an individual 6This is not merely a formality. The Court acts as

arbiter between the executive and the citizen and, in such cases, may control the

regularity of an arrest if the need for it arises 73 

#n the present matter, the accused is absent and there is no evidence before this )ourt that the

accused has been arrested which would give rise to the lodging of a provisional information to

bring the detention of the accused under 9udicial control

#n the light of the above and taking into account the reason and the purpose for which a

provisional information is lodged, it can neither come into e8istence before the arrest of a

suspect nor used as an instrument to effect such arrest The provisional information lodged in

the present matter is therefore struck out

A7HAMUTH (M!!)D"/v"%"8 $& A7HAMUTH (M!!) S"*-% D!+%:+ Ma!+%a+"6D"/v"%"8 -*& 1 A;%/ 20156

2 Ȁ DPP v IOI< 199 MR 1106

3 Ȁ A/a* =-%8-*>="*+/ v S+a+" -. Ma%+! 1995 SCJ 116