2024 (12) TMI 472 - AT - Money Laundering

Confirmation of provisional attachment order - HELD THAT - It is found that the property at 205 Jascon Plaza Ranchi in the name of the Appellant Dr. Pradeep Kumar is already in possession of the Appellant as is obvious from the Order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the Hon ble High Court of Jharkhand. The Appellant has also not made prayer for the restoration of the said property in Ranchi. In relation to the other immovable properties at Plot No. 20 in District Udaipur in the name of the Appellant Dr. Pradeep Kumar and at Plot No. 19 in District Udaipur as well as Plot of Land in Bangalore in the name of the Appellant Sh. Rajendra Kumar Ld. Counsel for the Appellants has prayed for restoration of possession not only in terms of the Judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary 2022 (7) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT (LB) but also for the reason that the properties can be better maintained. He has also clarified that the Appellants do not oppose the attachment but will also abide by the conditions imposed by the Tribunal till the matter is disposed of in the trial before the Special Court. It is also clear that the Appellants have not objected to abide by the impugned order in so far as the confirmation of the movable and immovable properties is concerned till the completion of the trial before the Special Court. These three Appeals are disposed of without causing interference in the Provisional Attachment Order so as in the impugned order of confirmation. The Appellants are directed to ensure that the properties are neither alienated nor transferred till conclusion of the trial. The Appellants are further directed to ensure that the properties are not dealt with in any manner till conclusion of the trial. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Confirmation of Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) dated 20.02.2018 for immovable and movable properties.
2. Restoration of possession of properties to the Appellants.
3. Compliance with impugned order and conditions till the trial's conclusion.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The judgment concerns appeals challenging the confirmation of the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) No. 04/2018 dated 20.02.2018, which attached immovable and movable properties totaling Rs. 1,76,38,527/-. The immovable properties included properties in the names of the appellants and others, with specific details provided in the impugned order dated 03.08.2018. The appellants contested the confirmation based on legal grounds, seeking restoration of possession citing relevant legal precedents.

2. The Appellants sought restoration of possession of the attached properties, arguing that the Respondent had taken possession of some properties post-confirmation. The Appellants relied on the judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., emphasizing that possession can only be taken in exceptional cases. The Respondent, however, opposed the restoration, citing the retrospective applicability of the judgment and contending that it altered statutory provisions. The Tribunal considered these arguments and ordered the restoration of possession for specific immovable properties to the Appellants, emphasizing compliance with imposed conditions till trial conclusion.

3. The Tribunal noted the Appellants' willingness to abide by the impugned order's terms regarding the confirmation of the attachment until the trial's completion. The judgment emphasized that the Appellants must ensure that the properties are not alienated or transferred and are maintained as per the conditions set forth. The Appeals were disposed of without interference in the Provisional Attachment Order or the confirmation order, directing strict compliance with the trial proceedings and property handling until its conclusion. The judgment concluded by disposing of all pending applications related to the Appeals.