Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2015 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 1573 - HC - Money LaunderingAppointment of the Judicial Member of the Adjudicating Authority - Prevention of Money-Laundering - principal ground seeking to quash the impugned show cause notice issued under Section 8 of the PMLA that it was issued by a Bench of the Adjudicating Authority which did not have a Judicial Member - Held that:- In a case where serious questions of law and fact arise, as in the present case, it is essential that one of the Members of the Bench constituted under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (5) of Section 6 of PMLA by the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority should be a Judicial Member as he “with his judicial experience would, by virtue of his specialised knowledge, would be better equipped to dispense with speedy and efficient justice”. This appears to be import of the words “as the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority may deem fit”. It is an admitted position that the post of a Judicial Member under Respondent No.3 is still lying vacant and that the impugned show cause notice was issued and the order under challenge passed in the absence of such a Member. Apart from what have been observed earlier, in a proceeding of the present kind, where orders were passed ex parte by the Adjudicating Authority in the absence of the Petitioner- University, it would have been essential for a Judicial Member to be part of the Bench considering the nature of the lis before it to ensure that the orders are passed in satisfaction of all the principles relevant and acceptable in law. The Petitioner-University, apart from showing technical flaws in the constitution of the Bench, concededly has been unable to place anything before this Court to indicate that they have been prejudiced in any manner. It is also conceded that the Petitioner- University has not yet responded to the show cause notice. It is of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate for the Petitioner-University to approach the Adjudicating Authority first and place all his grievances before it. In order to allay the apprehensions expressed by the Petitioner-University, it would be sufficient to direct the Respondent No.1 to first take up with the appropriate Ministry for appointment of a Judicial Member under Clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 6.
|