9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neither the appellant nor any of its officials have been named in the FIR or ECIR but that does not mean that the property attached would be released in favour of the appellant, in view of the allegations of the respondent that the properties in question are involved in proceeds of crime. The appellant has not been named may be because of the fact that the appellant is not involved in commission of the crime. The appellant has filed certain documents on 27.11.2020 in support of his contention that due diligence was followed which includes (a) copy of legal verification report, (b) copy of CIBIL reports of the borrowers, (c) copy of valuation reports of secured assets and (d) copy of memorandum submitted to credit committee for approval of loan to borrowers - Even though, the appellant has shown some diligence before sanction of the loan but the attachment under consideration cannot be lifted as any release of attachment from the questioned properties in favour of the present appellant is tantamount to depriving the Consortium of Banks of their money and jeopardizing their interest - thus, even if the appellant is considered as a bona fide third party then also the order of attachm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... complaint has already been filed before the Special Court and cognizance has already been taken and in view of that the appellant should approach the Special Court to lay its claims for release of the properties. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, once the cognizance is taken, it amounts to beginning of criminal trial in the court - the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent not agreed upon that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to pass any order on the legality of attachment order passed by the respondent and confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority - the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent not agreed upon that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to pass an order or on impugned order confirming/setting aside or modifying the attachment particularly when the charges are yet to be framed and the trial is yet to begin. The fifth legal submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no material for the formation of reason to believe under Section 5(1) of PMLA, 2002 - HELD THAT:- In the present case, neither party has filed the copy of the provisional attachment order or the copy of the O.C. But on perusa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fences under Section 120B read with Section 409, 420, 467, 468 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in the said FIR. i. M/s. Nathella Sampath Jewelry Private Limited. (M/s. NSJPL) (D-1) ii. Shri N. Ranganath Gupta, Promoter cum Managing Director (D-2). iii. Shri N. Prasanna Kumar, Director (D-3). iv. Shri N. Prapanna Kumar, Director (D-4). v. Shri Sohun C.J. Partner of M/s. Jeeravla Co., Chartered Accountant, Kilpauk Chennai Statutory Auditor of D-1 and unknown Public Servants and unknown others. b. It is revealed that during the period 2009 to 2017 M/s. NSJPL was enjoying financial assistance in the form of working capital credit limits with IOB, ICICI, HDFC Citi Bank to the tune of Rs.71 crores which was taken over by SBI during 2009 by sanctioning Rs.100 crores to M/s. NSJPL and that the exposure of SBI was reduced from Rs.100 crores to Rs.70 crores during January, 2010, with an overall limit of Rs.112 crores and that the limit of SBI subsequently increased during the period 2010 to 2012 to Rs.210 crores and that in February, 2013, the erstwhile State Bank of Travancore (eS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... financial statements of the company, the aforesaid banks suffered loss to the tune of Rs.379.75 crores as on 28.02.2018. g. That the account of M/s. NSJPL classified as NPA and recovery process initiated under SARFAESI. h. Since Sections 120-B, 420, 467 and 471 of IPC, 1860 and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are scheduled offences under PMLA so the Enforcement Directorate registered ECIR on dated 09.04.2018. i. That there is allegation of round tripping in the investment in the shares of M/s. NSJPL by the Promoters and that utilization of crime proceeds viz., NSJPL loan funds for settlement of loans in the name of trust in which the directors and promoters are trustees, for settlement of personal home loans of Promoters/Directors. j. That during the course of the investigation by Enforcement Directorate into the allegations they have identified and attached 37 immoveable properties out of which following four properties are involved in the present appeal:- i. Land measuring 5611 Sq.Feet in S.No.123 124 thereon bearing Door No.110 and situated at Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004 belonging to Nathella Prasanna Kumar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16 ii. That in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility a security interest by way of equitable mortgage by deposit of Title Deeds of secured assets was created by the borrowers in favour of the Appellant by depositing title deeds and executing a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 28.04.2016. iii. That in terms of the Loan Agreement the Borrowers undertook not to part with possession of or create third party rights in the property or any part of it (whether by way of sale, exchange, lease, mortgage, agreement or option or otherwise. Adjunct to this, it was undertaken by the borrowers that they would not avail of or obtain any further loan or facility on the security of the property without the prior written consent of Appellant. Since Appellant Financial Institution is a secured creditor, the charge on the said mortgaged property was duly recorded in the favour of Objector Financial Institution before the relevant/appropriate Authority(ies). iv. That the borrowers after availing the Loan Facilities did not adhere to the financial commitments made under the agreement and committed defaults with regard to repayment plan and committed defaults in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order at page no. 35 of appeal that a criminal case was registered vide RC 08/E/2018-BS FC/BLR on 24.03.2018 by CBI, BS and FC, Bangalore against various persons including borrowers of the appellant. Further, as recorded in the impugned order at page no. 42 of appeal that ECIR for investigation under PMLA was registered on 09.04.2018. These facts unambiguously establish that the appellant had acquired interest in the mortgaged properties almost two years prior to alleged scheduled offences. Thus, as held by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement Delhi and Ors. vs. Axis Bank, MANU/DE/1120/2019, interest of the appellant herein cannot be defeated or frustrated by attachment of such properties to such extent by the enforcement authority in exercise of its power under Section 8 of PMLA. ii. That admittedly there are no allegations of commissions of scheduled offences against the Appellant or any of the officials of the Appellant. That grant of loan to borrowers and creation of mortgage over aforesaid properties is also not disputed. It is further submitted that the alleged accused have cheated the banks and therefore, as held by this Hon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red interest in the property which is being subjected to attachment at a time anterior to the commission of the criminal activity, the product whereof is suspected as proceeds of crime, the acquisition of such interest in such property (otherwise assumably untainted) by such third party cannot conceivably be on account of intent to defeat or frustrate this law. In this view, it can be concluded that the date or period of the commission of criminal activity which is the basis of such action under PMLA can be safely treated as the cut-off. From this, it naturally follows that an interest in the property of an accused, vesting in a third party acting bona fide, for lawful and adequate consideration, acquired prior to the commission of the proscribed offence evincing illicit pecuniary benefit to the former, cannot be defeated or frustrated by attachment of such property to such extent by the enforcement authority in exercise of its power under Section 8 PMLA. . 165. Situation may also arise, as seems to be the factual matrix of some of the cases at hand, wherein a secured creditor, it being a bonafide third party claimant vis-a-vis the alternative attachable property (or dee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a High Court in Seema Garg Ors. v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement reported in MANU/PH/0204/2020 has considered the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement Delhi and Ors. vs. Axis Bank and Ors. MANU/DE/1120/2019 and has upheld the same in entirety except on a small issue where the Hon ble Delhi High Court has declared/treated words value of such property and property equivalent in value held within country at par. iv. That the respondent in its reply at page no. 3 para 6(c) has wrongly stated that PMLA, 2002 is a criminal law as it provides for confiscation of proceeds of crime or value thereof and entails punishment and since therefore, the criminal proceedings will override civil proceedings. In this regard, reliance is again placed upon the judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court in Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement Delhi and Ors. vs. Axis Bank and Ors. MANU/DE/1120/2019 at paragraph 171 (i) wherein it has been categorically held that the process of attachment (leading to confiscation) of proceeds of crime under PMLA is in nature of civil sanction which runs parallel to investigation and criminal actio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e concealed, transferred, or dealt with any manner which would result in frustration of proceeding under PMLA. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the judgment of the Hon ble Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Seema Garg Ors. v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement reported in MANU/PH/0204/2020 (para 17). iii. That this Hon ble Tribunal in JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi Ors. reported in MANU/ML/0094/2019 has also held that in absence of valid reasons the attachment notice and order are liable to be set aside. In the instant case the reason to believe as recorded by the Respondent fails to establish that the mortgaged properties qua Appellant was either proceeds of crime or was its by-product and same was likely to be transferred or dealt in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceeding under PMLA. iv. That the properties in question are already mortgaged with the Appellant and therefore the primary requirement of Section 5 that property is likely to be transferred by the alleged accused persons is absences since in terms of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, only the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that this Tribunal is bound by the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court, rather than the judgment passed by other High Courts as this Tribunal is situated and functioning within the territorial jurisdiction of the Hon ble Delhi High Court. He has relied on the following judgment: a) J. Sekar v. Union of India Ors. 2018 SCC OnLine Del 6523 Paras 38-41. b) Sita Ram Khemka v. K. K. Banerji Ors. MANU/UP/0038/1958 Para 8 c) Astik Dyestuff (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, MANU/GJ/1062/2013 Para 4 d) Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(4), Ahmedabad v. Upkar Retail Private Limited, 2018 SCC Online ITAT 12911Paras 3-5 3.4. Therefore, in light of the submissions made above, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned order dated 16.01.2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the provisional attachment order dated 31.07.2018 be set aside and the mortgaged properties may be released with right to appellant to exercise its rights under SARFAESI Act, 2002. 4. The case of the respondent: On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent inter-alia submitted that the properties in questio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 340.00 4.1c. And that the lending banks have reportedly stated that they have noticed the sign of sickness in M/s. NSJPL when they delayed the servicing of interest for April 2017 for all the Banks in the Consortium and that the Inspection of the Show Rooms indicated that there was no activity and low level of stocks at the Show rooms. State Bank of India ordered for a Stock Receivables Audit for the period ending 31.03.2017 and the same was conducted against M/s. NSJPL by M/s. Jayachandran Co., Chartered Accountants. M/s. NSJPL did not co-operate for physical verification of the stocks by the Auditors and after sustained efforts by the Bank, M/s. NSJPL agreed for verification of stocks by the above said auditors and the process of audit was delayed and completed only on 30.09.2017 and during the course of the Audit, the nominated Auditors noticed sudden depletion of Stock, Stock and Work in Progress. The Auditors noticed a huge drop in the value of stocks between 31.03.2017 19.07.2017. The value of Stock as on 19.07.2017 was Rs.18.17 Crores, whereas the Stock shown in the Stock Statement submitted to the bankers as on 31.03.2017 was Rs.495.06 Crores. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with a clear criminal/malafide intent to cheat and defraud the lenders. M/s. NSJPL fraudulently siphoned off the funds from the system without having informed the lenders. The observations of the Forensic Audit Report also confirm the diversion/siphoning of the funds. State Bank of India had alleged that the non co-operation of M/s. NSJPL and its officials in allowing the Bank nominated Stock auditors to inspect the stock and non furnishing of the relevant documents to the Forensic Auditor shows the malafide intention of the Company and its promoters in concealing the fraud committed by them; that the actions of M/s. NSJPL and its promoters in submitting false information in the financial statements submitted to the lenders and the disposal of the stocks/inventory which were hypothecated to the lenders without the knowledge of the lenders and not crediting the proceeds to the liability with the lenders and siphoning of funds from the system amounts to falsification of accounts, Criminal Breach of Trust and Cheating with an intention to cause wrongful loss to the Banks and wrongful gain to themselves and that the customers of the Company who had invested in the deposit schemes of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estigation under PMLA, 2002 led to the identification of proceeds of crime , the properties involved in the money laundering etc. The investigation also led to the round tripping in the investment of the Shares of M/s. NSJPL by its promoters, utilization of crime proceeds for acquisition of immovable property in the name of M/s. NSJPL and in the name of individuals related to M/s. NSJPL, utilization of the crime proceeds in the activities of Trusts held by the promoters of M/s. NSJPL including settlement of loans in the name such Trusts, utilization of the crime proceeds for settlement of personal home loans of the Directors and for settlement of existing loans, re-organization of ownership of properties and accommodative transactions, multiple layering of the crime proceeds, funding to the guarantor to enable her acquire a property in her name etc. From the investigation under PMLA, 2002 it was thus noticed that M/s. NSJPL, the Appellant herein and its Promoters/Directors viz., S/Shri Ranganatha Gupta, Prapanna Kumar Prasanna Kumar, Directors of M/s. NSJPL and also accused in the FIR of CBI, have committed the Scheduled Offences as alleged in the FIR No. RC 08/2018 dated 24.03. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating the General Public in collecting Deposits from them and the Economic Offences Wing of the Chennai Police have also registered an FIR against the promoters of M/s. NSJPL vide Crime No.11/2017 for offences under Section 409, 420 of IPC read with the TNPID Act. Two Directors were also reportedly arrested by the TN Police. The information provided by the EOW of TN Police to the Respondent authorities reveal that so far, 3241 Complaints have been received by them for the defaulted amount of Rs.42.99 Crores. It is further submitted that after the attachment of the property in the instant case, several depositors have also approached the Respondent authority seeking to cause investigation against the Appellant and also seeking refund. Thus, the investigation under PMLA, 2002 has been further extended to cover the above mentioned Scheduled Offence also. In other words, it is humbly submitted that M/s. NSJPL and its promoters has not only caused wrongful loss to the Consortium of Banks by indulging in criminal offences, but also cheated the General Public by collecting Deposits and failing to repay them. 4.7. It is submitted that 37 immovable properties (identified to be the procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 30629000 8600000 1271000 2318/2013 - NSC CO 168700000 11809000 180509000 0 147013000 20000000 1687000 440000000 33712000 473712000 167800000 232300000 35500000 4400000 4.9. That the funds for the Demand Drafts issued by Bank of India were out of a loan sanctioned by the said Bank to Prasanna Kumar and Prapanna Kumar. In respect of Drafts drawn from Axis Bank Indian bank, on perusal of the Bank statements, it is noticed that funds were transferred from the Bank account of M/s. NSJPL to the individual account of the buyers (viz., Prapanna Kumar, Prasanna Kumar and M/s. NSC Co. as the case may be) and from the said account and from the said transferred funds, DD s were taken in the name of the seller. The following further illustrates the money trail in the acquisition of the properties. i. That in respect of the immovable property registered vide Document No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Co. with Indian Bank. Further perusal of the said account of M/s. NSC Co., revealed that on the same day i.e. 18.07.2013, a total amount of Rs.22.05 Crores were transferred from the account of M/s. NSJPL with State Bank of India and from the said funds, various transfers were made including the above referred transfer of Rs.1,01,68,000/- 3,08,29,000/- to the Indian Bank account of Shri Prapanna Kumar. Thus, it is clearly evident that the funds from the loan account of M/s. NSJPL were utilized for acquisition of immovable property through Document No.2317/2013 dated 19.07.2013. iv. That in respect of the immovable property registered vide Document No.2318/2013 dated 19.07.2013 in favour of M/s. NSC Co., DD s to the tune of Rs.14,70,13,000/- were issued by Indian Bank on 18.07.2013 19.07.2013 and the funds for the said DD s were debited from the Indian bank account number 858891046 of M/s. NSC Co. DD No.598655 dated 18.07.2013 Indian Bank, South Usman Road, T.Nagar 86571148 DD No.598654 Dated 18.07.2013 Indian Bank, South Usman Road, T.Nagar 44689889 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar with Indian Bank, it was noticed that on the said date funds equivalent to the above said amount of Rs.3,26,55,800/- were not available. However to show the transactions as legitimate transfer of funds, each of the above cheque was presented for payments on different dates and funds were organised among the accounts of M/s. NSC Co., Shri Prapanna Kumar and Prasanna Kumar, to ensure sufficient funds existed in the respective account for clearances. Similar is the case of Sale Deed vide Document No.2680/2014 dated 04.09.2014 in favour of Prapanna Kumar Lakshmi Priya, the transaction value was shown as Rs.3,49,93,866/- and it was noticed from the Sale Deed that the consideration was reportedly paid through the following cheques for the under-mentioned amounts. Cheque No. Date Amount 716658 Dt.04.09.2014 6643927 716659 Dt.04.09.2014 7000000 716660 Dt.04.09.2014 7000000 716661 Dt.04.09.2014 7000000 716662 Dt.04.09.2014 7000000 TD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period from 15.04.2016 to 04.07.2017 he had in all paid EMI totalling Rs.91,51,930/- as detailed below. Out of the said instalments, two instalments were paid out of the RBL Account of Shri Prasanna Kumar, viz., A/c No.303015692225. Date of payment Amt paid Bank account 18.04.2016 312038 Indian Bank 24.05.2016 732251 Indian Bank 21.06.2016 732251 Indian Bank 22.06.2016 3308 Indian Bank 15.07.2016 732251 Indian Bank 16.08.2016 732251 Indian Bank 15.09.2016 732251 Indian Bank 15.10.2016 732251 Indian Bank 15.11.2016 732251 Indian Bank 30.12.2016 732251 RBL 02.03.2017 73 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Indian Bank 22.06.2016 4339 Indian Bank 15.07.2016 769183 Indian Bank 15.08.2016 769183 Indian Bank 15.09.2016 769183 Indian Bank 15.10.2016 769183 Indian Bank 15.11.2016 769183 Indian Bank 30.12.2016 769183 RBL 02.03.2017 769183 RBL 15.03.2017 769183 Indian Bank 31.03.2017 22748 Indian Bank 15.04.2017 769183 Indian Bank 29.04.2017 29229 Indian Bank 04.07.2017 769183 Indian Bank Total 9614288 (vi). That on perusal of each of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant is that after due diligence it has sanctioned home loans to the borrowers and a sum of Rs.9 crores through loan account no. HFHL_231020000003580 and Rs.9.25 crores through loan account no. HFHL_231020000003592 out of which Rs.8,80,09,276/- and Rs.9,19,43,766/- were disbursed on dated 31.03.2016 and 30.03.2016 respectively. 5.2.(ii). That the loan became NPA on 01.02.2018 and thereafter demand notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, 2002 were initiated and after sixty days symbolic possession of following two properties were taken:- i. Land measuring 5611 Sq.Feet in S.No.123 124 thereon bearing Door No.110 and situated at Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004 belonging to Nathella Prasanna Kumar Nathella Lakshmi - Sl.No.4 of Schedule 1 in Para No.43 of OC 1015/2018 Page 130), acquired vide Document No.2316/2013 dated 30.7.2013 in the name of Nathella Prasanna Kumar Nathella Lakshmi. ii. Land measuring 1271 Sq.Feet forming part of the 6566 Sq.Feet in S.No.123 124 bearing Door No.110 and situated at Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004 in RS No.1654/9 Block No.l34 Mylapore Division belonging to Nathella Prasanna Kumar Nathella Laks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are defaulter and that the appellant had granted loan bonafidely and that the appellant is a bona fide third party who sanctioned the loan against the security of the aforesaid properties. This submission of the appellant has been negated by the fact that the borrowers of the appellant took different type of loans from Consortium of Banks during the period 2009 to 2017 and has prima facie acquired the question properties in the year 2013 and 2014 by utilizing the loan taken from Consortium of Banks and those loans were taken by falsifying the stocks etc., and diverted the funds for the purpose other than the purpose for which the loans were taken. Thereby, it is prima facie clear, for the purpose of attachment, that the properties in question have been acquired out of proceeds of crime and prior to the loans granted by the appellant in the year 2016 and those properties have been mortgaged as a security for the loan from the appellant by the borrowers of the appellant. The appellant has referred and relied on para 163 and 165 of the judgment passed in the batch matters by Hon ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement Ors. Vs. Axis Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... defeat the objective of law against moneylaundering. In case of tainted asset - that is to say a property acquired or obtained as a result of criminal activity - the interest acquired by a third party from person accused of moneylaundering, even if bona fide, for lawful and adequate consideration, cannot result in the same being released from attachment, or escaping confiscation, since the law intends it to vest absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances , the right of such third party being restricted to sue the wrong-doer for damages, the encumbrance, if created with the objective of defeating the law, being treated as void (Section 9). In view of the above, even if the appellant is considered as a bona fide third party then also the order of attachment cannot be set aside or modified due to the fact that prima facie allegation is that the proceeds of crime have been travelled to acquire the properties in question. Therefore, in view of above discussion, this legal submission is not acceptable. 5.3.(ii). The second legal submission made by the appellant that it is a secured creditor being a bona fide third party had initiated actions against mortga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. The Hon ble Court has clearly held that the RDBA, SARFAESI Act and Insolvency Code can t prevail over PMLA. Rather, his lordship has observed that all these laws must co-exist with harmony. The learned counsel for the appellant has also relied on the judgment of Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in Seema Garg Ors. Vs. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement on this legal issue. This judgment is perused, the question of priority or overriding effect of other laws over PMLA and vice versa appears to be not an issue before the Hon ble High Court and there appears to be no findings on that except on the question of status of attachment of properties as value equivalent to proceeds of crime. In the appeal before us, the properties have not been attached as value equivalent to the proceeds of crime so this judgment is of no help to the appellant. Further, recently the Division Bench of Hon ble High Court of Punjab Haryana passed a judgment in the matter of CRS-S-4326-SB-2017(O M) titled as Deputy Director Vs. PNB Housing Finance Ltd., CRA-S-3916-SB-2017 (O M) titled as Deputy Director Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. Ors. wherein their lordship have held that PMLA would prev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e orders of attachment (as confirmed) but, the law in PMLA, at the same time, also confers jurisdiction on the special court to entertain such claim for purposes of restoration of the property during the trial of the case [Section 8]. The jurisdiction to entertain objections to attachment conferred on the appellate tribunal on one hand and, on the special court, on the other, thus, may be coordinate, to an extent. 168. An argument, however, was raised, by the appellants that the respondents herein should have approached the special court, instead of the appellate tribunal, for consideration of their respective claims. 169. In view of above-noted legislative scheme, it must be clarified that if the order confirming the attachment has attained finality, or if the order of confiscation has been passed or, further if the trial of a case for the offence under Section 4 PMLA has commenced, the claim of a party asserting to have acted bonafide or having legitimate interest will have to be inquired into and adjudicated upon only by the special court. 170. But, the above exception cannot be applied to all cases of bona fide third party claimants so as to confer a general r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visional attachment order or the copy of the O.C. But on perusal of para 3 to 26 of the impugned order, the details have been mentioned about how the proceeds of crime have been used to acquire the properties and para no. 27 to 29 of the impugned order are the conclusions arrived at by the complainant on reason to believe. Therefore, it appears that there is compliance with regards to the reason to believe. In the light of above discussions, I do not find any merit in these legal submissions of the appellant. 5. 3.(vi). The last legal submission made by the appellant is that Section 3 of the PML Act, 2002 is not applicable in the present matter. This legal submission is considered. The appellant is admittedly neither an accused in the FIR nor in the ECIR nor there is any material on record that the present appellant is arrayed as an accused in the prosecution complaint in which the properties involved herein are part of the prosecution complaint. The proceedings before this Tribunal is to examine the legality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority not of the persons who alleged to have committed the offence of money laundering. Therefore, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
