TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertain the appeal. However, brevity of reasoning cannot be understood in legal parlance as absence of reasoning. While no reasoning in support of order whether judicial/quasi-judicial order is impermissible, the brief reasoning would suffice to meet the ends of justice at least at interlocutory stages and would render the remedy of appeal purposeful and meaningful. - without dwelling into the merits of the matter since the case of the petitioners do not fall in the exceptions as laid down in Whirlpool Corporation (1998 (10) TMI 510 - SUPREME COURT), the writ petitions and applications are dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative efficacious remedies available under Section 26 of the PML Act - Decided against Appellant. - W P(C) 6014/2015 & CM 10913/2015 (stay), W P(C) 6020/2015 & CM 10928/2015 (stay), W P(C) 6022/2015 & CM 10934/2015 (stay), W P(C) 6023/2015 & CM 10938/2015 (stay), W P(C) 6024/2015 & CM 10942/2015 (stay), W P(C) 6026/2015 & CM 10948/2015 (stay) - - - Dated:- 2-7-2015 - Mukta Gupta,J. For the Petitioner : Mr A S Chandhiok, Sr Adv. with Mr Jayant K Mehta, Mr Samiron, Mr Sumeet Singh, Mr Biswajit, Mr Indranil Ghosh, Advs. For th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hemes were floated which were not permissible under the SEBI/RBI etc law and criminal cases have been filed. 6. Commissions of ₹ 378.89 crores have been paid to various agent for arranging funds in the scheme. ED will consider action against such persons also as per law under PMLA. 7. Money has flown to other persons also which will be examined by ED for appropriate action. 8. Ones under Section 8(1) has not been discharged. 9. Conditions of Section 5 8 have been complied with. 10. There is no requirement under law to convey the reasons recorded to the defendants. 11. Complainant apparently will examine the case thoroughly and see if any other party is also required to be made defendant. If so it will take appropriate action as per law and pass fresh PAO with regard to such other parties. 12. Perusal of the PAO, OC, arguments of both the sides lead to the conclusion that prima facie case for confirmation of PAO is made out. 13. The case is not only for involvement of persons in money laundering process against whom case is filed with the Court/FIR but PMLA covers those persons also who are in possession of proceeds of crime. 14. Merely because inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the corresponding law of any other country, before the competent court of criminal jurisdiction outside India as the case may be and become final after an order of confiscation is passed under sub-section (5) to sub-section (7) of section 8 or section 58B or sub-section 2A or section 60. 4. Based on the findings of the adjudicating authority it is stated that the authority was under an obligation to adjudicate i.e. analyze, address and answer with reasons its finding. There is no finding regarding the 'proceeds of crime'. There is no finding as to which person was induced by the petitioners to invest the money. The entire and repeated reliances is on the order of SEBI which order has been stayed by the Guwahati High Court wherein it categorically held that prima facie the schemes floated by the petitioners do not fall within the meaning of expression of 'Collective Investment Scheme (CIS)', thus the SEBI does not have the jurisdiction to take action in the affairs of the business of the petitioners. The interim order passed by the Guwahati High Court in W.P.(C) 4298/2013 has attained finality as the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India has since be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moy Dutta, Vice President (Finance) Amitabh Mukherjee, Pijus Kumar Das IT Head, Sudhir Shaw AGM (Accounts) and N.C. Pillai, Sr. General Manager (Admn.) of the Rose Valley Group of Companies recorded by the competent officer. As per Section 50(2) of PML Act, the director or the officer concerned has power to examine the witnesses and the statements so recorded are admissible in evidence not being before a Police Officer. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision in Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trademarks, Mumbai Ors. (1998) 8 SCC 1 and also the decisions in Harbanslal Sahina Anr. Vs. IOCL Ors. (2003) 2 SCC 107; Popcorn Entertainment Anr. Vs. City Industrial Development Corporation Anr. (2007) 9 SCC 593; M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Anr. Vs. Jahan Khan (2007) 10 SCC 88 and Committee of Management Anr. Vs. Vice Chancellor Ors. AIR 2009 SC 1159, which decisions follow Whirlpool Corporation (supra). In Whirlpool Corporation the Supreme Court laid down the triple test for entertaining a writ petition despite availability of the remedy of an appeal in contractual matters i.e. firstly if the action of the respondent is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
