2024 (10) TMI 225 - AT - Money Laundering

Money laundering - permission to respondent ED to retain/seize/freeze the documents, digital records, bank accounts etc., seized from the premises of various persons including the present appellants, during the search conducted on 07.04.2017 - HELD THAT - The impugned retention order passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority to continue the seizing/ freezing of the documents and material seized/freeze by respondent ED, till the completion of investigation. After the completion of investigation, prosecution complaint is already filed by respondent ED, wherein present appellant Bhawna Kirpal along with her other family members are arrayed as accused persons. Even otherwise, the aforesaid property is mentioned in the list of properties for the purpose of confiscation in case of conviction, in prosecution complaint case under PMLA. Therefore, the impugned order passed by Ld. Adjudicating Authority was just an interim order/step to protect the same, till the conclusion of trial. Therefore, the appellants are not agreed upon, hence, the present appeals are liable to be dismissed being devoid of any merits. However, seeing the fact that prosecution complaint is already filed, the present appellants are entitled to the copies of all relied upon documents/seized material and have right to apply for release of all un-relied documents (if any), if the same are not required for any further investigation. The present appeals are hereby dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Release of seized bank accounts of appellant M/s G B Creative Line and Proprietor Bhawana Kirpal.
2. Seizure of bank accounts, locker containing jewellery, and vehicle of appellant Bhawana Kirpal based on FIR No. RCBD No. 1/2016 filed by CBI.

Analysis:
1. The first issue revolves around the release of seized bank accounts of appellant M/s G B Creative Line and Proprietor Bhawana Kirpal. The appellant's counsel argued that the bank accounts were collateralized by properties and all financial transactions of the appellant were conducted through these accounts. The appellant sought the release of these accounts, emphasizing the legitimate nature of the transactions. However, the respondent ED contended that the accounts were linked to fraudulent activities causing substantial financial loss to a bank. The ED argued that the accounts were essential for further investigation into money laundering activities. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments, dismissed the appeal, stating that the retention of the accounts was necessary for ongoing investigations and potential confiscation in case of conviction.

2. The second issue pertains to the seizure of bank accounts, locker containing jewellery, and a vehicle belonging to appellant Bhawana Kirpal based on a CBI FIR. The appellant's counsel highlighted that the jewellery in possession was received as gifts during her wedding and that the vehicle was purchased through legitimate means. The ED alleged that the assets might have been acquired through proceeds of crime and were crucial for tracing money laundering activities. The Tribunal noted that the properties were mentioned in a prosecution complaint and were subject to potential confiscation. Despite the appellant's arguments, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the retention of the seized assets for further investigation.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals, emphasizing the importance of retaining the seized assets for ongoing investigations. The appellants were granted access to relevant documents but were not successful in securing the release of the seized bank accounts, jewellery, and vehicle. The judgment underscored the need to safeguard assets linked to potential money laundering activities until the completion of the trial.