Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + AT Money Laundering - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 992 - AT - Money LaunderingOffence under PMLA - provisional order of attachment - attachment of property involved in money-laundering - order of provisional attachment attaching property on the basis the statement given by this Appellant’s son S.V Srinivas on 12.6.2012 who was interrogated by the respondent (who was arrayed as the 9th Defendant) - Held that:- Adjudicating Authority is bound to go through reason to believe recorded before passing the provisional attachment order while coming to the conclusion to issue a notice under section 8(1) of the Act particularly to a person who is not an accused in the schedule offence and not a party to the prosecution complaint. Stereotypes notice u/s 8(1) cannot be issued in such types matters in these types of cases. The case of appellant has not been dealt by the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order. His property was provisionally attached without any notice and without recording his statement. He is senior citizen/ practicing Advocate. He was not aware that the amount spent on renovation was alleged tainted money. Even otherwise, any offence if committed by his son cannot be attributed to the father unless the father has link and nexus in the crime and involves in the criminal activities. In the present, such allegations against the appellant are not raised by the respondent. The impugned order dt. 17/10/2012 passed by the Adjudicating Authority against the appellant is not sustainable in law and wholly contrary to section 5 and 8 of the Act. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The impugned order is set-aside against the appellant, consequently the provisional attachment order with regard to present appellant is also quashed. The property is released forthwith. It is directed that in case, his son who is one of the accused in prosecution complaint which is still pending ( The proceedings have been stayed by the Hon’ble High Court at Karnataka ) and if he is hold guilty after trial if to be conducted after disposal of writ petition. The respondent would be entitled to attach a sum of ₹ 10 lacs if it established that it was a proceed of crime. The appeal and pending applications are disposed of.
|