Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2022 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1043 - HC - Money LaunderingService of notice - Eviction notice - direction to vacate the premises - owner of property - HELD THAT:- This Court has gone through the materials on record. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is not the owner of the property. The property in question was in the name of the wife of the petitioner who has sold the property to one Pawan Kumar Singh in the year 2005. Pawan Kumar Singh was the accused in ECIR/02/PAT./2012 and he was the owner of M/s Classic Coal Construction Pvt. Ltd. and with regard to that coal company, Pawan Kumar Singh was facing the money laundering case. Thus, it is an admitted that the property in question was in the name of Pawan Kumar Singh, however, the petitioner was continuing and living in the property in question. It is section 5 of the said Act, which provides for procedure for attachment of the property involved in money laundering. On perusal of section 8 of PMLA, it is crystal clear that if the adjudicating authority is having reason to believe that any person has committed the offence under section 3 or in possession of the proceeds of crime as on the date of registration of the case is made out, the competent authority is empowered to register the case under the provisions of the said Act - In the case in hand, the disputed questions of fact are involved. The petitioner has already filed a title suit with regard to the property in question which is still pending. The learned counsel for the Enforcement Directorate has contended that notices have been issued which has been disputed by the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is third party and if third party is involved, in the statute care has been taken to adjudicate the same in light of section 9 of the said Act and the Special court is empowered to exercise that. Section 26 of the Act also speaks to file appeal if any person is aggrieved by the order made by the adjudicating authority under the Act - Section 26 of the Act also speaks that any person can file appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. So far the judgment relied by Mr. Kalyan Roy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner with regard to principles of natural justice is not in dispute if the court comes to the conclusion that principles of natural justice has been violated alternative remedy is not a bar to entertain the writ petition. However, in the case in hand the statute is very clear and the property in question taken over by the Enforcement Directorate. This Court is not inclined to quash the notice - It is open to the petitioner to avail remedy under the law - Petition disposed off.
|