2016 (8) TMI 1254 - HC - Money Laundering

Provisional Attachment orders - PMLA - the case was listed for hearing on 06.05.2016, the petitioner did not appear and therefore, it was adjourned to 15.09.2016 - Held that - Without going int the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner or by the respondent, is of the view that it would be suffice to direct the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal at an early date.

Summary

Issues:
1. Provisional attachment under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002
2. Arbitration proceedings and appeal dismissal
3. Writ petition for return of documents
4. Appeal against provisional attachment confirmation

Provisional Attachment under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002:
The case involved a provisional attachment order issued against the petitioner under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The order alleged that proceeds of crime had been invested in another company, making its assets liable for attachment and potential confiscation. The petitioner challenged this attachment through a writ petition, arguing that certain documents were to be returned to them by the Additional Superintendent of Police, CBI, Bangalore. The petitioner contended that the provisional attachment should be set aside due to the orders related to the return of documents.

Arbitration Proceedings and Appeal Dismissal:
The petitioner had also been involved in arbitration proceedings, which led to an appeal being filed and subsequently dismissed by a single Bench of the Court. This aspect was highlighted by the petitioner's counsel to support their argument against the provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Writ Petition for Return of Documents:
In addition to challenging the provisional attachment, the petitioner had filed a writ petition seeking the return of specific documents from the Additional Superintendent of Police, CBI, Bangalore. The High Court had ordered the documents to be handed over to a designated judge for eventual return to the petitioner upon certain conditions being met.

Appeal Against Provisional Attachment Confirmation:
The respondent, representing M/s. Sakthi Aiswarya Spinning Mills Private Limited, had filed an appeal against the confirmation of the provisional attachment. The appellate authority, the Money Laundering Appellate Tribunal in New Delhi, was directed to expedite the disposal of the appeal within ten weeks from the date of the court's order. The High Court emphasized the importance of the appellate authority resolving the matter promptly, without delving into the merits of the claims made by either party.