9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy of the same in favour of the appellant, in the interest of Justice. (ii) to pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. 2. Brief facts of the case is as under; (i) The appellant is a company carrying on the business into real estate and hospitality activities. (ii) The appellant had purchased the properties bearing Sy. No. 187/3 measuring 28 guntas, Sy. No. 188/1 measuring 3 acres 20 guntas and Sy. No. 210/2 measuring 2 acres 29 guntas, totally measuring about 6 acres 37 guntas situated at Gunjur Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the said properties') from its owner late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa for a valuable sale consideration, under a registered sale deed dated 07.06.2023. (iii) Earlier to the above conveyance, late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa and the appellant herein had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding for development of the said properties. (iv) Since late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa had not honoured his commitment as per the terms of Memorandum of Understanding, the appellant had filed a suit for specific performance in OS No.1223/2017 which was decreed in his favour. Thereafter, he h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not able to comply with the terms and conditions of JDA of the said properties with the appellant herein. (ix) Further, as the conviction of late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa in the aforesaid C.B.I case was for disproportionate asset to the extent of Rs. 1,72,40,951/- which was directed to be confiscated to the Government, late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa invoking Article 32 of the Constitution of India, had approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court with a plea that, value of his 7 assets which are attached are valued at an amount of Rs. 1,72,40,951/- by the Hon'ble Special Court and is confiscated by the respondent, he sought for furnishing of the bank guarantee of the said amount in replacement of all his 7 properties. (x) In the said petition, late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa had made the C.B.I as respondent No. 2, this appellant as respondent No. 3 and the E.D. as respondent No. 4. During the proceedings of the above case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court considering the plea of late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa that he would furnish the bank guarantee in lieu of 7 properties, did not accept for the bank guarantee, but directed for furnishing of Fixed Deposit receipt in the Nationalized Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he original documents pertaining to the said properties. On receipt of the said letter, C.B.I informed that as the said original documents filed along with charge sheet in Special CC No. 56/2015, late Sri. G.E. Veerabhadrappa should seek for the return of the same from the Hon'ble Court. (xvi) Subsequent to withdrawal of attachment of the said properties by the respondent E.D, the entries showing the lien of the respondent over the said properties was also deleted. (xvii) Thereafter, late Sri. G.E. Veerabhadrappa approached the appellant stating that due to certain reasons, he is not in a position to continue with the JDR and hence, offered to sell the said properties in favor of the appellant. (xviii) Since the lien over the said properties was lifted, the offer made by late Sri. G.E. Veerabhadrappa to sell the said properties to the appellant herein was accepted, the appellant purchased the said properties under the valid sale deed dated 07.06.2023. Thereafter, the appellant had proceeded to develop the properties for construction of residential apartment. (xix) By judgment dated 24.06.2024, the Hon'ble XXXII Special Judge for C.B.I cases in Special CC No. 359/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which were confiscated, the appellant has locus standi to prefer this appeal. As on the date of purchase of the said properties, the attachment was lifted and late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa had right, title and possession over the said properties and accordingly, he had executed the sale deed in favour of the appellant. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the appeal. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the procedure for trial has been provided under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short hereinafter referred to as "P.M.L.A Act"). The properties of late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa has been confiscated by exercising power under section 8 (5) of the P.M.L.A Act and now, the properties are vested with the Central Government under section 9 of the P.M.L.A Act. The remedy for the appellant is under Sub Section (8) of Section 8 of the P.M.L.A Act and not by way of an appeal under Section 454 of Cr.P.C. The said remedy under Section 8 (8) of the P.M.L.A Act is before the Special Court. The order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court for furnishing the Fixed Deposit receipts keeping lien in favour of the C.B.I and E.D is an interim arr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Special Court, shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor: Provided that the Central Government may also appoint for any case or class or group of cases a Special Public Prosecutor. (2) XXXXXXX. (3) XXXXXXX." 10. Considering the above said provision, except as otherwise provided in the P.M.L.A Act, the provision of Cr.P.C., are made applicable to the proceedings before the Special Court. The order of confiscation of the properties of the accused by the Special Court amounts to disposal of properties under section 452 of Cr.P.C. Against the order of said disposal of the properties passed under section 452 of Cr.P.C, the appeal shall lie to this Court under Section 454 of Cr.P.C. The provision of the P.M.L.A Act does not provide for filing of any appeal against the order of confiscation of properties. Therefore, the appeal shall lie under section 454 of Cr.P.C to this Court as appeal against conviction lie to this Court. 11. Late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa has been convicted by the Court of XXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and the Special Judge for C.B.I cases, Bengaluru vide order dated 14.02.2023 in Special C.C. No. 56/2015, for the offence under Section 13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner has been convicted by the Court of the XXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI cases, Bengaluru, vide order dated 14.02.2023 in Special CC. No. 56/2015, for an offence under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment of two years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Though, the CBI had alleged disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs. 2,91,70,984/-, however, the Court only directed confiscation of disproportionate assets to the extent Rs. 1,72,40,951/- in favour of the Central Government. 4. In pursuance to the registration of case by CBI, the Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore Zonal Office also registered an ECIR bearing ECIR/BGZO/16/2015 dated 06.11.2015 to investigate offence of laundering of proceeds of crime derived from the said scheduled offence of having disproportional assets alleged by CBI. 5. Enforcement Directorate also passed an order dated 29.06.2018 for provisional attachment of various properties including properties involving third party interest as disproportionate assets alleged in the CBI case. Appeal filed by the petitioner against confirmation of att ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings against the petitioner in pending CBI matters as well as PMLA mattes." 10. We further make it clear that this order is only by way of interim arrangement and shall be subject to the final outcome of the proceedings and is without prejudice to the contention of the respective parties. 11. The pending proceedings shall be decided strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits without in any way influenced by the present interim arrangements. 12. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the matter stands finally disposed of. 13. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of." 13. Pursuant to the said order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa obtained Fixed Deposit receipts for an amount of Rs. 1,72,40,951/- with a lien favouring the C.B.I and E.D in the Canara Bank on 02.05.2023 late Sri. G.E. Veerabharappa communicated / directed vide letter dated 02.05.2023 informing about the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court and also he obtaining the Fixed Deposit receipts for Rs. 1,72,40,951/- with a lien in favour of the C.B.I and E.D and requested the Directorate to withdraw lien of attachment over his properties which includ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n (3) of Section 8 of the P.M.L.A Act, which provides for confiscation of properties reads as under; "8. Adjudication.- (1) xxxxxx (2) xxxxx (3) Where the Adjudicating Authority decides under sub-section (2) that any properties is involved in money-laundering, he shall, by an order in writing, confirm the attachment of the properties made under sub-section (1) of section 5 or retention of properties or record seized or frozen under section 17 or section 18 and record a finding to that effect, whereupon such attachment or retention or freezing of the seized or frozen properties or record shall- (a) continue during [investigation for a period not exceeding three hundred and sixty-five days or the pendency of the proceedings relating to any offence under this Act before a Court or under the corresponding law a of any other country, before the competent Court of criminal jurisdiction outside India, as the case may be; and (b) become final after an order of confiscation is passed under sub-section (5) or sub-section (7) of section 8 or section 58-B or sub-section (2-A) of section 60 by the Special Court. Explanation.- For the purposes of computing the period of three hundr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
