2018 (2) TMI 2047

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sh Special Public Prosecutor ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved against the order of provisional attachment dated 13.02.2018. 2.Heard Mr.B.Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Ramesh, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent. 3.According to the petitioner, when the very allegation of loss of revenue to the Government is confined to Rs. 53.50 crores in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... perty. 4.On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that after analysing all the facts and circumstances, the impugned order of attachment, that too, a provisional one was passed and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to seek any indulgence from this Court. He further pointed out that though the petitioner has chosen to refer to the counter filed in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... FIR also failed, as this Court dismissed the said Crl.O.P. by specifically holding that unless the investigation gets completed, this Court cannot jump into a conclusion that the petitioner is innocent bonafide purchaser and not privy to the alleged crime. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the claim made in this writ petition, the writ petition is disposed of, by granting lib .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X