TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecessary action within the time prescribed. In failure to do so under this Act, all the proceedings, seizures/frozen under Section 17 would be lapsed ipso facto. If a particular thing is to be done in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner only and none other. The provisions of section 8 (3) (a) provides that the attachment or retention of property or record seized shall continue during the investigation for a period not exceeding ninety days. It is admitted position that no prosecution complaint has been filed against the Appellant herein. The properties and records of the Appellant were seized only for the purpose of investigation. The period of 90 days as prescribed under section 8 (3) (a) has already elapsed as more than an year has been expired. No prosecution complaint has been filed by the respondent against the appellants. The said fact has been admitted by the learned counsel for the respondent. The impugned order in the above said matter was passed on 5.9.2017 for retention of property. Admittedly, no prosecution complaint has been filed within the period of ninety days from the date of passing the retention order. More than one half year has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Manager, Central Bank of India, Burrabazar Branch, Kolkata and Shri K.N. Mondal, the-then Senior Manager, Central Bank of India, Burrabazar Branch, under Sections 120B IPC read with Sections 420, 409, 468, 471, 477A IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c ) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in respect of alleged fraudulent transactions through the Cash Credit account of M/s. Rajco Steel Enterprises, resulting in wrongful loss to the Central Bank of India, Burrabazar Branch, Kolkata, to the tune of ₹ 65.93 crores as on 28.02.2009. 5. Such complaints would prima facie indicate that the alleged offences, if any, were perpetrated by M/s. Kali International Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Rajco Enterprises prior to 28.02.2009. 6. A search was conducted by the team of officers of the Enforcement Directorate, Kolkata at the registered office of the appellant on May 9, 2017, on the purported premise that the Sri Ramesh Kumar Gupta and his brothers had hatched a criminal conspiracy in association with the bank officials; pursuant whereto funds were fraudulently withdrawn from the cash credit accounts of Kali International Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10. Section 17 of PMLA, 2002 reads as under: 17 Search and seizure. -(1) Where [the Director or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Director authorised by him for the purposes of this section,] on the basis of information in his possession, has reason to believe (the reason for such belief to be recorded in writing) that any person - (i) has committed any act which constitutes money-laundering, or (ii) is in possession of any proceeds of crime involved in money-laundering, or (iii) is in possession of any records relating to money-laundering, (or) (iv) is in possession of any property related to crime] then, subject to the rules made in this behalf, he may authorize any officer subordinate to him to - (a) enter and search any building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft where he has reason to suspect that such records or proceeds of crime are kept; (b) break open the lock of any door, box, locker, safe, almirah or other receptacle for exercising the powers conferred by clause (a) where the keys thereof are no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection, to the Adjudicating Authority in a sealed envelope, in the manner, as may be prescribed and such Adjudicating Authority shall keep such reason and material for such period, as may be prescribed. (3) Where an authority upon information obtained during survey under section 16, is satisfied that an evidence shall be or is likely to be concealed or tampered with, he may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, enter and search the building or place where such evidence is located and seize that evidence. Provided that no authorization referred to in subsection (1) shall be required for search under this subsection. (4) The authority seizing any record or property under sub-Section (1) or freezing any record or property under sub-Section (1A) shall, within a period of thirty days from such seizure or freezing, as the case may be, file an application, requesting for retention of such record or property seized under sub-Section (1) or for continuation of the order of freezing served under sub- Section (1A), before the Adjudicating Authority.]. 11. Section 18 of PMLA, 2002 reads as under: 18. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (5) The Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate before whom any such person is brought shall, if he sees no reasonable ground for search, forthwith discharge such person but otherwise shall direct that search be made. (6) Before making the search under sub-section (1) or sub-section (5) the authority shall call upon two or more persons to attend and witness the search, and the search shall be made in the presence of such persons. (7) The authority shall prepare a list of record or property seized in the course of the search and obtain the signatures of the witnesses on the list. (8) No female shall be searched by any one except a female. (9) The Authority shall record the statement of the person searched under sub-section (1) or sub-section (5) in respect of the records or proceeds of crime found or seized in the course of the search:18 [***] (10) The authority seizing any record or property under sub-section (1) shall, within a period of thirty days from such seizure, file an application requesting for retention of such record or property, before the Adjudicating Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecords. (3) On the expiry of the period specified under sub-section (1), the records shall be returned to the person from whom such records were seized or whose records were ordered to be frozen unless the Adjudicating Authority permits retention or continuation of freezing of such records beyond the said period. (4) The Adjudicating Authority, before authorising the retention or continuation of freezing of such records beyond the period specified in sub-section (1), shall satisfy himself that the records are required for the purposes of adjudication under section 8. (5) After passing of an order of confiscation [or release under subsection (5) or sub-section (6) or sub-section (7) of section 8 or section 58B or sub-section (2A) of section 60] , the Adjudicating Authority shall direct the release of the records to the person from whom such records were seized. (6) Where an order releasing the records has been made by the Court [Adjudicating Authority under section (5) of section 21] the Director or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf may withhold the release of any such record for a period of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
