MR. R. JONATHAN SUSHIL vs STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOTHANUR P. S.

1
R
Reserved on : 17.06.2026
Pronounced on : 01.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

ST
DATED THIS THE 01 DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.8401 OF 2026
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8417 OF 2026
IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.8401 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

MICAH MARK
S/O LATE MR. MARK
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
ND TH
NO.31, 2 FLOOR, 11 D CROSS,
YADAVA LAYOUT, ARVIND NAGAR,
BENGALURU – 560 084.
... PETITIONER

(BY SRI M.S.SHYAM SUNDAR, SR.ADVOCATE A/W
SRI TIMOTHY CHARLES, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR PS
REPRESENTED BY
Digitally signed by
PADMAVATHI B K
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka

2
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU – 560 001.

2 . DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
NEW DELHI – 110 011
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
SHRI. SUNIL KUMAR SINHMAR
... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPP-I FOR R-1;
SRI MADHU N.RAO, SPL.PP FOR R-2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR, IN CRIME NO. 202 OF
2026, DATED 11/06/2026, REGISTERED BY KOTHANUR P.S FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 318(4), 335(a)(ii),
336(3), 238, 61(2) AND 190 OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA,
2023 [BNS), AND FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 13, 17 AND 18 OF THE UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES
(PREVENTION) ACT, 1967 [UAPA] PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE
CITY CIVIL COURT, BENGALURU (CCH-50) (AT ANNEXURE-A).

IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.8417 OF 2026
BETWEEN:

1 . MR. R. JONATHAN SUSHIL

3
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
S/O LATE MR. ABRAHAM CHRISTOPHER RAJAN
RESIDING AT NO. 106 GLORIOUS A1,
ESSEL GARDEN, DODDAGUBBI ROAD,
KOTHANUR, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA – 560 077.

2 . MR. AJIT MATHAI
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
S/O MR. VERGHESE MATHAI
RESIDING AT NO. 55, BYRATHI CROSS,
BYRATHI VILLAGE, BENGALURU NORTH,
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 077.

3 . MR. VARGHESE CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
S/O MR. T.V.CHACKO.
RESIDING AT BLESSING HOME,
WARD NO. 20, BHARRI PARA
SORID NAGAR, DHAMTARI,
CHHATTISGARH – 493 773.

4 . MR. BABLU KURMI
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
S/O BISHNU KURMI
RESIDING AT PATPARA PT-II
GOALPARA, ASSAM – 783 130.

5 . MR. SUPREME JOY
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
S/O MR. G ARON
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 102,
C BLOCK, UDAYANAGARI,
SATHYA NAGAR, MYSURU CITY,
KARNATAKA – 570 019.
... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI S.BASAVARAJ, SR. ADVOCATE A/W

4
SRI MAHESH Y.L., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR PS
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU – 560 001.

2 . DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
NEW DELHI – 110 011
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
SHRI. SUNIL KUMAR SINHMAR
... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, SPP-I FOR R-1;
SRI MADHU N.RAO SPL.PP FOR R-2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.202/2026
DATED 11.06.2026 REGISTERED BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 318(4), 335(a)(ii), 336(3), 238, 61(2)
AND 190 OF THE BNS 2023 AND FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 13, 17
AND 18 OF THE UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT 1967
(UAPA) PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE CITY CIVIL COURT,
BENGALURU (CCH-50) AT ANNEXURE - A.

5
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 17.06.2026, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

Both these petitions emanate from a singular criminal
proceeding - Crime No.202 of 2026 -registered for offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 335(A)(ii), 336(3), 238, 61(2),
190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 13, 17 and
18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘UAPA’). Criminal Petition No.8401 of 2026 is
instituted by accused No.2, while Criminal Petition No.8417 of 2026
is preferred by accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Both petitions,
therefore, converge upon the legality and sustainability of
proceedings initiated in Crime No.202 of 2026.

6
Shorn
2. of unnecessary details, facts in brief, germane, are
as follows: -
2.1. Accused No.2 was intercepted at the Kempegowda
International Airport while allegedly found in possession of 24
international debit cards. The accusation against him does not halt
at mere possession. It is alleged that he had repeatedly traversed
beyond the territorial shores of the nation and, upon each return,
brought with him multiple ATM debit cards, whereafter, the
Enforcement Directorate conducted search and seizure operations
on 18-04-2026 and 19-04-2026 for suspected violations under the
Foreign Exchange Management Act (‘FEMA’ for short).

2.2. During the course of search and investigation, the
Enforcement Directorate claims to have unearthed a network of
financial operations linked to an entity based in the United States of
America, operating under the name The Timothy Initiative . Upon
scrutiny of financial transactions, documentary material, and
statements recorded during investigation/search, the Directorate
formed a prima facie opinion that international debit cards issued

7
by Trust Bank, USA, were systematically utilized to withdraw funds
through ATMs across India. The allegation is: between November
2025 and April 2026, funds approximating ₹92.55 crores
(equivalent to USD 99,95,240) were allegedly utilized in
contravention of statutory regulations; further, between January
2024 and March 2026, withdrawals nearing ₹40 crores were
allegedly effected from states such as Chhattisgarh and Assam
using the same mechanism.

2.3. The cards, it is alleged, were all issued under the
deceptively generic name “Santosh Kumar” and were coded region-
wise as “NE-1”, “NE-2”, “Southern Region-1” and the like - an
arrangement allegedly devised to shroud the identities of actual
users and circumvent Know Your Customer requirements. Such
camouflage, according to the prosecution, was not incidental, but
deliberate. Ajit Varghese Mathai, arrayed as accused No.3, is
alleged to have overseen the financial operations of The Timothy
Initiative in India, while Jonathan S. Rajan is said to have
supervised its overall operations. The remaining accused are
alleged to have functioned as facilitators in ATM withdrawals and

8
subsequent deployment of funds. On the foundation of these
allegations, the Enforcement Directorate shares information to
st
register a complaint before the 1 respondent, culminating in
registration of the subject crime.

2.4. A brief alleged backdrop deserves notice. Upon
interception at the airport, accused No.2 was directed to appear
nd
before the 2 respondent in New Delhi on 18-04-2026 and was
subsequently taken into custody. It is the contention of the
petitioner that the governing statute confers no authority upon the
nd
2 respondent to take any individual into custody. The summons
issued to him were challenged before this Court in Writ Petition
No.13156 of 2026. In the said writ petition, accused No.2
specifically alleged custodial assault and coercion at the hands of
the Enforcement Directorate and further apprehended that
additional offences would be foisted upon him. Notices were issued
by a coordinate Bench. It is in this backdrop that, on 11-06-2026,
the impugned complaint came to be filed before another police
station, now invoking not only the earlier offences, but also the
draconian provisions of UAPA. It is this invocation of UAPA that has

9
propelled accused No.2 to institute Criminal Petition No.8401 of
2026.

3. The companion petition by accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6
arises out of the same factual matrix and challenges the very same
crime, particularly the invocation of offences under UAPA.
Repetition of facts, therefore, would be an exercise in redundancy.

4. Heard Sri M.S.Shyam Sundar, learned senior counsel
appearing for accused No.2/petitioner in W.P.No.8401 of 2026;
Sri S. Basavaraj, learned senior counsel appearing for accused
Nos.1, 3 to 6/petitioners in Writ Petition No.8417 of 2026;
Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor-I
st
appearing for 1 respondent/State and Sri Madhu N. Rao, learned
nd
Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2
respondent/complainant in both the cases.

10
SUBMISSIONS:
PETITIONERS :

IN CRL.P.8401 OF 2026:

5. The learned senior counsel Sri M.S. Shyam Sundar,
appearing for accused No.2 would vehemently contend that
nd
proceedings initiated by the 2 respondent are in violation of the
provisions of the Act. The provisions of the Act do not empower the
Enforcement Directorate to communicate to any of the jurisdictional
Police or any authority for registration of a crime. The crime is not
registered either suo-motu or on the basis of any complaint made
against accused No.2 or the other accused. He would submit that
the Enforcement Directorate is acting under the Prevention of
Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA’) and not under the Act. He
would submit that there is no ECIR filed by the Enforcement
Directorate for it to investigate and communicate using Section
66(2) of the PMLA. He would contend that drastic and stringent
provisions of UAPA are deliberately added, as if accused No.2 is
involved in terrorist activities. He would submit that not even the
basic prima facie material is available to demonstrate that the

11
activities would attract Sections 13, 17 and 18 of the UAPA. If there
is no proximity to the alleged offences attracting ingredients of the
Act, further investigation must not be permitted to be continued, as
the accused are persons of Christian machinery who help the poor.
Therefore, this Court must lend its protective hand and obliterate
the crime.

IN CRL.P.8417 of 2026:

6. The learned senior counsel Sri S. Basavaraj appearing for
the accused in Criminal Petition No.8417 of 2026 would reiterate
the legal contentions of the learned senior counsel Sri M.S. Shyam
Sundar and would contend that for these accused to be drawn in
respect of overt acts of crime, there is not even an iota of
ingredient or there is any indication of link between accused No.2
and the other accused. It is only on the basis of suspicion that
these accused may have helped unlawful activities against the
nation, the provisions of UAPA are invoked against them.

12
STATE IN COMMON :

7. Per contra, the learned State Public Prosecutor-I
Sri B.N. Jagadeesha appearing for the State would vehemently
refute the submission in contending that the investigation has just
begun. The investigation must be permitted in the teeth of serious
offences that are alleged. It is not that the petitioners are running a
missionary. It appears that in the garb of missionary they are
indulging in unlawful activities.

ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE IN COMMON :

8. The learned counsel Sri Madhu N. Rao, representing the
Enforcement Directorate would vehemently refute the submissions
of both the learned senior counsel in submitting with regard to the
modus operandi of these persons. The learned counsel would
submit that a Bank in USA by name Trust Bank is where the
accounts are opened. From the accounts it is not 24, but there are
900 debit cards issued. 24 debit cards were found in possession of

13
accused No.2 alone and from those debit cards close to ₹100 crores
are withdrawn and those funds are used to fund left wing
extremists in Karnataka, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. Left wing
extremists is not only a banned organization, but a banned terrorist
outfit. If accused are the ones who are funding the said
organization, the crime must not be interdicted at this stage. He
would submit that it is only a tip of ice berg and the entire
investigation must be permitted to be continued. The submissions
of accused No.2 with regard to filing a writ petition and contending
that he was assaulted and tortured in the custody would not mean
that the present crime is being registered as a counterblast, while it
is not. It is for the activities against the nation.

9. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.

14
CONSIDERATION :

THE CORE:
The central issue that falls for consideration is narrow,
though its implications are profound: whether the
investigation deserves to be interdicted at this incipient
stage on the premise that the Enforcement Directorate
lacked authority to communicate information leading to
registration of the crime.

THE BACKDROP:
10. The afore-narrated facts and link in the chain of events lie
in a narrow compass at this juncture, as what led the Enforcement
Directorate at the outset to initiate interception and search against
accused No.2 is that he was possessing 24 international debit cards.
After search and seizure, proceedings were initiated against
accused No.2 and a communication is made by the Enforcement
Directorate to the Director General of Police of the State of
Karnataka on 06-05-2026. The communication reads as follows:

15

“F. No.: T-2/HIU-I/09/2026 Dated: 06.05.2026

To,

The Director General of Police
No.2, Nrupatunga Road,
Opposite Martha's Hospital,
Bangalore, Karnataka-560001

Sir/Madam,

Subject: - Sharing of information u/s 66(2) of PMLA, 2002
for registration of FIR against (1) Jonathan S Rajan, (2)
Micah Mark, (3) Ajit Verghese Mathai, (4) Varghese
Chacko, (5) Bablu Kurmi, (6) Supreme Joy, (7) The
Timothy initiative, USA and others, for offences under the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967- reg.

Investigations were initiated by the Directorate of
nd
Enforcement against 1) Jonathan S Rajan (Flat No 106, 2
Floor, A-1 Building, Lewis Glorious Apartments, Essel Garden,
Doddagubbi Road, Kothanur, Bengaluru-560077 2) Micah Mark
nd th
(No.31, 2 Floor, 11 D Cross, Yadava Layout, Arvind Nagar,
Bengaluru-560084), 3) Ajit Verghese Mathai (Site No. 55,
Byrathi Lane, Behind MLA Byrathi, Suresh's Residence, Kothnur,
Bengaluru-560077), 4) Varghese Chacko (Blessing Home, Ward
20 Bharri Para Sorid Nagar, Dhamtari, Chattisgarh-493773), 5)
Bablu Kurmi (Village: Suruadol, Dhonubhanga, Police Station:
Dhupdhara, Dist. Goalpara, Assam-783123), 6) Supreme Joy
(House No. 102, C Block, Udayanagari, Sathya Nagar, Mysore
Karnataka-570019), 7) The Timothy Initiative, USA (PO Box
98177, Raleigh NC-27624-8177, USA and Others under FEMA,
1999. A search and seizure operation was carried out u/s 37 of
FEMA 1999 r.w.s. 132 of the Income Tax Act by this Directorate
on 18.04.2026 and 19.04.2026 at various premises of the above
persons and entities.

2. On the basis of analysis of financial transactions, records,
documents, statements recorded at the search premises of

16
Jonathan S Rajan, Micah Mark, Ajit Verghese Mathai Varghese
Chacko, Bablu Kurmi and Supreme Joy, it has been revealed
that the said individuals and others in criminal conspiracy with
The Timothy Initiative (TTI), a USA based organization, have
coordinated and withdrawn foreign funds through various ATMs
across India using foreign debit cards, issued by Truist Bank of
USA. The said funds were withdrawn and utilised in
contravention of the provisions of FEMA, 1999 and FCRA, 2010.
Funds amounting to Rs 92.55 crore approx. (USD 99,95,240)
has been utilized in contravention of legal provisions in the last
6 months i.e from November 2025 to April 2026. On preliminary
analysis of seized records it was observed that funds of Rs.44
crores approx. have been withdrawn using foreign debit cards
across multiple states i.e, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, Assam etc
during the period from January 2024 to March 2026.

3. Micah Mark was intercepted by this Directorate at
Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru on 18.04.2026,
wherein subsequently he was found to be in possession of 24
foreign debit cards of Truist Bank. Search operations were also
conducted at his residential premises. Investigation revealed
that Micah Mark has made multiple such foreign trips and has
returned with foreign debit cards. He is a key person in the
financial operations of TTI in India. It was further revealed that
the said cards (24 Nos.) were printed only in the name of
Santosh Kumar, being a very generic name in India, (earlier
cards were being issued in the name of regions i.e. NE-1, NE-2,
Southern Region-1 etc) on the instructions of Ajit Verghese
Mathai so as to avoid suspicion and LEAs and in violations of the
KYC norms to conceal the real user, thereby forging the real
identity and using fraudulent means to evade the law. Details of
such cards, prepared after analysis of the seized material, is
enclosed as Annex-1 . It is pertinent to mention that over 1000
such debit cards have been distributed in India over the past
few years. It is noteworthy that post the search action by this
Directorate, TTI Global portal (www.ttiglobal.org) also became
inaccessible for Indian users. Further, the data, which is
maintained on cloud, has been deleted from the back end
through remote access, of the servers which are maintained by
TTI, USA. This amounts to the destruction of evidences during
ongoing search proceedings. Copy of the incident report and
video recording of the incident wherein Micah Mark has accepted

17
the deletion of his account from backend is attached herewith as
Annx-2.

4. Investigation further revealed that there has been
unusual and suspicious cash withdrawals using these
foreign debit cards in LWE affected regions, including
Dhamtari and the Bastar region of Chhattisgarh, wherein
Rs. 6.34 crores (approx.) has been withdrawn in the past
few years. Details of the same are enclosed as Annex-3.
It has been observed that these foreign debit cards are
being used to withdraw large amounts of cash in a
planned manner which indicates possible involvement of
organized networks. Such emergence of a parallel cash-
based economy in Naxalite-affected areas poses a serious
threat to the security and financial integrity of India and
can facilitate the movement of illicit funds for unlawful
activities It is pertinent to note that cash withdrawal to
the tune of approx. Rs.3.2 crores (3200 transactions of
10,000 each) has been done from a single AU Small
Finance Bank ATM located at Vijay Plaza, Bastar Road,
Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) by using two such debit cards
which raises concerns regarding the end use of the
withdrawn funds. These fund withdrawals have happened
under the monitoring of Varghese Chacko, a field level
functionary, who resides at # Blessing Home, Ward 20
Bharri Para Sorid Nagar, Dhamtari, Chattisgarh-493773.
The aforesaid pattern of systematic cash withdrawals,
conducted through a network of entities and field
functionaries, in LWE/Naxalite-affected districts of
Chhattisgarh, using foreign funds sourced from and
directed by The Timothy Initiative, USA, prima facie
constitutes "unlawful activity" within the meaning of
Section 2(0) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
(UAPA), 1967, being an activity which is intended to, and
does, facilitate the movement of foreign funds into
regions under active Naxal influence, thereby causing
disaffection against India and threatening its
sovereignty, territorial integrity and internal security. The
Timothy Initiative, USA, and its Indian network of
individuals/entities, prima facie constitutes an "unlawful
association" as the said organisation has undertaken
activities which are prejudicial to the sovereignty and

18
territorial integrity of India. The accused persons are
accordingly prima facie liable for prosecution under the
provisions of UAPA, 1967 for committing and abetting
unlawful activities, for raising funds intended for the
commission of a terrorist act in LWE-affected areas and
for conspiracy to commit a terrorist act or any act
preparatory.

5. Search conducted at the premises of Ajit Verghese
Mathai revealed that he is overall Finance Head of the
India operations of TTI, USA, through various front/shell
entities like Lead LLP and Crosswise LLP, having
registered office in Bangalore. Investigation revealed
that foreign debit cards, were utilised for withdrawing
funds, were distributed under his direct supervision. Cash
amounting to Rs 37 lakhs, which was withdrawn using
the foreign debit cards, was also seized from the
premises of Ajit Vergherse Mathai. The seizure memo in
enclosed as Annex-4.

6. The search at the premises of Jonathan Rajan has
revealed that he is the overall Operations in-charge of TTI in
India. In conspiracy with Shri Ajit Verghese Mathai and others,
he has ensured that the funds withdrawn from ATMs are used
for the activities of TTI across India which includes training,
preaching, brainwashing of poor people leading to left-wing
extremism, among others. He oversees the training organised
by TTI, the selection of persons who conduct such trainings, and
the identification of venues. As Operations Head, he sends fund
requirements to the Finance team, which in turn arranges
funding from TTI, USA through the foreign debit cards in
question.

7. Varghese Chacko, Supreme Joy and Bablu Kurmi are field
level functionaries who in conspiracy with others have
withdrawn funds in cash using the foreign debit cards a multiple
ATMs and used the same for advancing the purposes of TTI.
Evidence revealed that expenses in excess of Rs. 95 crores have
been incurred by TTI in India. On being asked about the screen
shot, as under, which is taken from quickbook.com (Accounting

19
software used by TTI) during the search proceeding, Micah Mark
informed that the same pertains to expense bills raised by
various field coordinators during the last 06 months, which TTI
has paid during Nov 2025 to Apr 2026.

8. The above facts indicate that Jonathan Rajan, Micah
Mark, Ajit Verghese Mathai, Varghese Chacko, Bablu Kurmi,
Supreme Joy, The Timothy, Initiative, USA and others - in
criminal conspiracy with TTI, USA - have, through an elaborate
scheme: (i) used foreign debit cards issued by a USA-based
bank to withdraw foreign-source funds in cash through Indian
ATMs; (ii) caused the said cards to be printed in a single false
name ("Santosh Kumar") in breach of KYC norms; (iii) circulated
more than a thousand such cards amongst persons who are not
the account-holder; (iv) thereby caused foreign funding of
approx. Rs. 92.55 crore to be received and utilised in India
without FCRA registration / prior permission and without being
routed through the designated FCRA Account; and (v) on
interception of Shri Micah Mark, remotely destroyed the digital
back-end record of the scheme.

9. The acts of the accused persons constitute commission of
the cognizable offences under the a) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

20
2023 relating to criminal conspiracy; cheating and dishonestly
inducing delivery of property; forgery for purpose of cheating;
forgery of valuable security or document of title; using as
genuine a forged document or electronic record; making a false
document/false electronic record and causing disappearance of
evidence of an offence, b) Under the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967 for committing and abetting unlawful
activities, conspiracy to commit a terrorist act or any act
preparatory thereto, and other applicable laws.

10. In view of the above, it is requested that an FIR may
kindly be registered against Jonathan Rajan, Micah Mark, Ajit
Verghese Mathai, Varghese Chacko, Bablu Kurmi, Supreme Joy,
The Timothy Initiative, USA and others involved in the said
fraudulent activities. It is further requested that a thorough
investigation may be conducted to identify the entire network of
shell entities, trace the flow of funds, ascertain the role of each
accused person, and take appropriate legal action in accordance
with law.

11. This issues with the approval of Competent Authority.

Encl: As above”
(Emphasis added)

The communication dated 06-05-2026 issued under Section
66(2) of the PMLA is neither cryptic nor perfunctory. It is a
detailed dossier narrating the alleged modus operandi of the
accused, the flow of foreign funds, the manner of ATM
withdrawals, and the suspected channelization of such funds
into regions afflicted by Left Wing Extremism (LWE). The
communication records, in unmistakable terms, a prima facie

21
opinion that the activities complained of may attract offences not
merely under economic statutes, but also under UAPA, as they
allegedly facilitate movement of foreign funds into Naxal-
affected regions, thereby posing a threat to the sovereignty,
territorial integrity, and internal security of the nation. This
communication is taken forward by two other communications
dated 06-06-2026 and 10-06-2026. They read as follows:
“UÉ,
,
ೕ ಆಯುಕ ರು
.
ೆಂಗಳರು ನಗರ

,
ಾನೇ

: " " (The Timothy Initiative)
ಷಯ ೕ ಇ ೕ ಸಂ"ೆ# $ಾಗೂ
.
&ೊ'ಾಥ) ಎ ಾಜ) ಮತು ಸಂಬಂ/ತ ವ 1 ಗಳ ರುದ3ದ
.
4ಾನೂನು ಾ5ರ ಚಟುವ 4ೆಗಳ ಕು8ತು ದೂರು

: , , :
ಉ:ೆ;ೕಖ &ಾ8 =ೇ>ಶ'ಾಲಯ ನವ=ೆಹ Bಾರತ ಸ4ಾ>ರ ರವರ ಪತD ಸಂEೆ
T-2/HIU-I/09/2026, : 06.05.2026.
'ಾಂಕ
*

,
FೕಲGಂಡ ಷಯ4ೆG ಸಂಬಂ/IದಂJೆ ಉ:ೆ;ೕKತ &ಾ8 =ೇ>ಶ'ಾಲಯ ರವರು ಈ
" "
ಕMೇ8 UÉ ಕಳN5Iರುವ ಪತDದ ; ೕ ಇ ೕ ಸಂ"ೆ# ಮತು ಅದ ೊಂPೆ ಸಂಬಂ zsÀ
. , , , ,
$ೊಂ ರುವ &ೊ'ಾಥ) ಎ ಾಜ) Q4ಾ ಾR> ಅST ವUೕ> ಮVಾW ವUೕ> Xಾ4ೋ

¼À¹
ಬಲು; ಕುQ> ಮತು ಸುYDೕಂ &ಾZ ರವರುಗಳN =ೇ [ೆ\] 4ಾ^>ಗಳನು_ ಬ 4ೋಟ ಂತರ

ರೂ`ಾWಗಳ ಅಕDಮ ಹಣ ವPಾ>ವbೆ ನ[ೆIರುವcದು $ಾಗೂ ನಕde Yೕfತ ಪD=ೇಶಗಳ ;
(ED)
ಅನು ಾ'ಾಸgದ ನಗದು ವ5hಾಟುಗಳ ; JೊಡUರುವ ಬPೆi &ಾ8 =ೇ>ಶ'ಾಲಯ ತ Eೆ
.
ನ[ೆಸು ರುವc=ಾU jIರುJಾ ೆ

22
(FEMA)
ಸದ8 ಚಟುವ 4ೆಗಳN =ೇ ಮಯ ವ>ಹbಾ 4ಾ k $ಾಗೂ ಅಕDಮ
(PMLA) ,
ವPಾ>ವbೆ ತ[ೆ 4ಾ k ಗಳ ಉಲ;ಂಘ'ೆmಾUದುk ಾnoೕಯ ಭದDJೆPೆ ಗಂqೕರ ೆದ84ೆಯನು_
. ,
ಉಂಟು ಾಡುವ "ಾಧ JೆW=ೆ ಎಂದು ವರ mಾU=ೆ ಈ ಷಯದ ಗಂqೕರJೆ AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ಪ8ಗsI &ಾ8
,
=ೇ>ಶ'ಾಲಯವc ಈPಾಗ:ೇ ಎtಐಆv =ಾಖ ಸಲು wಾರಸು ಾ rgÀÄªÀ 5'ೆ_:ೆ ಪDಕರಣದ
, .
ªÀAvÉ
ಕು8ತು ಸಮಗD ತ Eೆ ನ[ೆI ತYgತಸ#ರ ರುದ3 4ಾನೂನು ಕDಮ 4ೈPೊಳNy 4ೋ8ರುJಾ ೆ

¤AiÀÄªÀiÁ£ÀÄ¸ÁgÀ
ಆದುದ8ಂದ 4ೇಂದD ಸ4ಾ>ರದ ಪತDದ ; ಪD"ಾ YIರುವ ಎ:ಾ; ಅಂಶಗಳನು_
, .
ಪ8 ೕI ಅಗತ 4ಾನೂನು ಕDಮ 4ೈPೊಳNyವಂJೆ 4ೋರ:ಾU=ೆ
,
ತಮz ನಂಬುPೆಯ

¸À»/-
( . . . ,
[ಾ ಎಂ ಎ ಸ ೕಂ ಐYಎ ¸ï )

ಮ$ಾ =ೇ>ಶಕರು ಮತು

ಮ$ಾ 8ೕ|ಕರವರ ಕ'ಾ>ಟಕ”
…. …. ….

“ಕ'ಾ>ಟಕ ಸ4ಾ>ರ
( )
ೕ ಇ:ಾEೆ
,
¸ÀA.C¥ÀgÁzsÀ/(4)/«Ä±Àæ/141/2026 ೕ ಆಯುಕ ರವರ ಕMೇ8

ೆಂಗಳರು ನಗರ
::10.06.2026.
'ಾಂಕ
: :
‚ಾಪನ

: . (The Timothy Initiative)
ಷಯ ೕ ಇ ೕ ಎಂಬ ಸಂ"ೆ#

$ಾಗೂ &ೊ'ಾಥ) ಎ ಾಜ) ಮತು ಸಂಬಂ/ತ ವ 1 ಗಳ ರುದ3

4ಾನೂನು ಾ5ರ ಚಟುವ 4ೆಗಳ ಕು8ತು ಸೂಕ 4ಾನೂನು ಕDಮ
.
ಜರುUಸುವ ಬPೆi

1. , , : :
G¯ÉèÃR:
&ಾ8 =ೇ>ಶ'ಾಲಯ ನವ=ೆಹ Bಾರತ ಸ4ಾ>ರ ರವರ ಪತD ಸಂEೆ
T-2/HUI-1/09/2026, : 06.05.2026.
'ಾಂಕ
2. : -2/19/2026
ೕ ಪDƒಾನ ಕMೇ8 ಪತD ಸಂEೆ ಅಪ ಾಧ
: 06.06.2026.
'ಾಂಕ

*

23
(2)
ಈ FೕಲGಂಡ ಷಯ4ೆG ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ„ಂJೆ ಉ:ೆ;ೕಖ ರ 8ೕJಾ ೕ ಪDƒಾನ
,
ಕMೇ8Wಂದ I…ೕಕ8ಸುವ ಪತD ಮತು ಅದ ೊಂUನ ಅಡಕಗಳN ಸ…ಯಂ hೇದ hಾUದುk ಸದ8 ಪತD
,
ಮತು ಅದ ೊಂUನ ಅಡಕಗಳನು_ ಪ8 ೕI ಸೂಕ 4ಾನೂನು 8ೕJಾ ಕDಮ 4ೈPೊಂಡು 4ೈPೊಂಡ
.
ಕDಮದ ಬPೆi ವರ ಯನು_ ಮರು ಟ`ಾ ನ; ಸ ;ಸಲು ಸೂ†ಸ:ಾU=ೆ

¸À»/-
( )
Iೕ ಾಂT ಕು ಾv Iಂ‡ ಐYಎ
,
ೕ ಆಯುಕ ರು
.”
ೆಂಗಳರು ನಗರ

It is then on 11-06-2026 the crime comes to be registered. The
issue now would be, whether investigation should be interdicted at
this juncture on the score that the Enforcement Directorate did not
have power to communicate the information to register a crime.

11. It is an admitted fact that the communication comes
about under Section 66(2) of PMLA. Section 66 reads as follows:
“ 66. Disclosure of information .— (1) The Director or
any other authority specified by him by a general or
special order in this behalf may furnish or cause to be
furnished to—

( i ) any officer, authority or body performing any
functions under any law relating to imposition of
any tax, duty or cess or to dealings in foreign
exchange, or prevention of illicit traffic in the
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances under
the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985 (61 of 1985); or

( ii ) such other officer, authority or body performing functions
under any other law as the Central Government may, if in

24
its opinion it is necessary so to do in the public interest,
specify, by notification in the Official Gazette, in this
behalf, any information received or obtained by such
Director or any other authority, specified by him in the
performance of their functions under this Act, as may, in
the opinion of the Director or the other authority, so
specified by him, be necessary for the purpose of the
officer, authority or body specified in clause ( i ) or clause
( ii ) to perform his or its functions under that law.

(2) If the Director or other authority specified
under sub-section (1) is of the opinion, on the basis of
information or material in his possession, that the
provisions of any other law for the time being in force are
contravened, then the Director or such other authority
shall share the information with the concerned agency for
necessary action.”

Section 66 of the PMLA deals with disclosure of information. Sub-
section (2) expressly empowers the Director or authorised
authority, upon forming an opinion that provisions of any other law
stand contravened, to share such information with the concerned
agency for necessary action. The statutory architecture is clear: the
provision is intended to ensure that information uncovered in the
course of investigation under one enactment does not remain siloed
where it reveals infractions under another. To accept the contention
that such communication is permissible only in relation to offences
strictly under PMLA would amount to reading clause (i) of sub-
section (1) into irrelevance and rendering the legislative intent

25
nugatory. Statutory interpretation cannot be so myopic as to
defeat the plain purpose of the enactment.

12. The genesis of the entire matter lies in the possession of
24 debit cards by accused No.2—all bearing the same name. What
initially appeared as a financial irregularity, upon search and
seizure, allegedly revealed a far wider network. The Directorate,
therefore, cannot be faulted for communicating such information to
the jurisdictional police. The submission that proceedings under the
FEMA empower search and seizure, but not disclosure of
information to other agencies cannot be accepted. Statutes
operating in cognate fields must be construed harmoniously,
not in watertight compartments.

13. The submission of the respective learned senior counsel
that only those offences that are being investigated into under the
PMLA empowers communication to the respective agencies to
register a crime for violation of any provision of law cannot be
accepted, as clause (i) clearly empowers the Enforcement

26
Directorate to communicate all of those that are found in the
clause, which includes violation of Foreign Exchange.

14. The connected submission is the other side of the same
coin, that proceedings initiated under Section 37 of the FEMA which
deals with power of search and seizure, only empowers the
Enforcement Directorate or officers of Enforcement Directorate to
conduct search and seizure and not communicate or share
information with other agency, this also cannot be accepted, as the
two – PMLA and FEMA – will have to be read in tandem, and if read
in tandem, the submission of the learned senior counsel Sri M.S.
Shyam Sundar would tumble down. This relates to offences under
the IPC as alleged by the Enforcement Directorate.

THE UAPA :

15. The other offences alleged are the ones punishable under
the UAPA. Therefore, the said provisions are required to be noticed.
Section 2 deals with definitions. Section 2(o) deals with ‘unlawful
activity’. It reads as follows:

27
“ 2. Definitions .—(1) In this Act, unless the context
otherwise requires,—
…. …. ….
“( o ) “unlawful activity”, in relation to an individual or
association, means any action taken by such individual or
association (whether by committing an act or by words,
either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible
representation or otherwise),—

( i ) which is intended, or supports any claim, to
bring about, on any ground whatsoever, the
cession of a part of the territory of India or
the secession of a part of the territory of
India from the Union, or which incites any
individual or group of individuals to bring
about such cession or secession; or

( ii ) which disclaims, questions, disrupts or is
intended to disrupt the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of India; or

( iii ) which causes or is intended to cause
disaffection against India;”

Sections 13, 17 and 18 of the UAPA read as follows:

“ 13. Punishment for unlawful activities .—(1)
Whoever—

( a ) takes part in or commits, or

( b ) advocates, abets, advises or incites the commission
of,

any unlawful activity, shall be punishable with imprisonmentfor
a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be
liable to fine.

28
(2) Whoever, in any way, assists any unlawful activity of
any association, declared unlawful under Section 3, after the
notification by which it has been so declared has become
effective under sub-section (3) of that section, shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
five years, or with fine, or with both.

(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to any treaty,
agreement or convention entered into between the Government
of India and the Government of any other country or to any
negotiations therefor carried on by any person authorised in this
behalf by the Government of India.
… … …
17. Punishment for raising funds for terrorist act .—
Whoever, in India or in a foreign country, directly or indirectly,
raises or provides funds or collects funds, whether from a
legitimate or illegitimate source, from any person or persons or
attempts to provide to, or raises or collects funds for any person
or persons, knowing that such funds are likely to be used, in full
or in part by such person or persons or by a terrorist
organisation or by a terrorist gang or by an individual terrorist
to commit a terrorist act, notwithstanding whether such funds
were actually used or not for commission of such act, shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less
than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life,
and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation .—For the purpose of this section,—

( a ) participating, organising or directing in any of the
acts stated therein shall constitute an offence;

( b ) raising funds shall include raising or collecting or
providing funds through production or smuggling or
circulation of high-quality counterfeit Indian
currency; and

( c ) raising or collecting or providing funds, in any
manner for the benefit of, or, to an individual
terrorist, terrorist gang or terrorist organisation for
the purpose not specifically covered under Section
15 shall also be construed as an offence.

29

18. Punishment for conspiracy, etc .—Whoever
conspires or attempts to commit, or advocates, abets, advises
or incites, directs or knowingly facilitates the commission of, a
terrorist act or any act preparatory to the commission of a
terrorist act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to
imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.”

Sections 13, 17 and 18 of the UAPA deal respectively with unlawful
activities, raising funds for terrorist acts, and conspiracy. At this
stage, the Court is not called upon to return findings of guilt;
it is required only to examine whether prima facie material
exists to justify investigation. The material presently
available, particularly the communication under Section
66(2), cannot be said to be so barren as to warrant judicial
interdiction. Any deeper scrutiny at this stage would risk
trenching upon the domain of investigation and potentially
prejudicing either side.

16. Insofar as the companion petition filed by accused Nos.
1,3, 4, 5 and 6 is concerned, the contention of the learned senior
counsel Sri S. Basavaraj is that they have no role to play and they
have not even met accused No.2, is again contrary to the record.

30
Accused No.2 himself in his petition avers that it is the case of the
nd
2 respondent that one Ajit Varghese Mathai, accused No.3 was in-
charge of financial operations of “The Timothy Initiative” and
Jonathan S. Rajan was the person who oversaw overall operations
of the Initiative in India and while other accused persons allegedly
facilitated ATM withdrawals.

17. This may be the narration of allegation, but the link in the
chain of events is established in the communication made under
Section 66(2) of PMLA. Therefore, this is not a case warranting
exercise of inherent jurisdiction to nip the crime in the bud.
The case concerns National security. National security is the
invisible architecture upon which the sovereignty, stability
and constitutional order of a nation rest. One of the gravest
threats to National security in the present times is, the
clandestine funding of extremism. Funding, therefore,
becomes the oxygen that enables extremist movements to
survive and proliferate. The danger of extremist financing
lies not merely in the money transferred, but in the
consequences it unleashes. Left unchecked, such funding

31
can transform ideological extremism into organized violence,
threatening National unity and public safety. The
preservation of National security, therefore, demands robust
vigilance against financial channels that sustain extremism.
Effective intelligence gathering, strict regulatory oversight,
inter-agency coordination, and rigorous enforcement of anti-
money laundering. Institutions tasked with financial
monitoring and security enforcement must act with both
precision and urgency to dismantle these covert networks.
Protecting National security is thus a collective
constitutional obligation, and preventing the funding of
extremism forms an indispensable part of that solemn duty.

18. The Courts must therefore be circumspect in stifling
investigation, particularly where allegations touch upon
issues of economic subversion intertwined with National
security. In the teeth of such accusations as observed
hereinabove, investigation is not merely permissible - it
becomes imperative.

32

19. For the aforesaid reasons, the petitions merit dismissal.
Accordingly, stand dismissed . It is, however, made clear that the
petitioners remain at liberty to avail themselves of all remedies
available in law, should the final report eventually be laid against
them.
It is made clear that the observations made during the course
of this order are only for the purpose of consideration of the case of
the petitioners under Section 528 of the BNSS and the same would
not bind or influence the ongoing investigation.

Consequently, pending applications if any, also stand
disposed.

Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE

Bkp
CT:MJ