TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be entitled only to the balance amount that is now available. Canara Bank will not only be entitled to the principal amount but also the interest accrued thereon - In this case, the money that were attached are not counterfeit currency notes or phenolphthalein applied currency notes to be marked as material objects during trial. The proof of the fact that these amounts were provisionally attached by the Enforcement Directorate, the confirmation of the attachment by the Adjudicating Authority and the return of the amounts to Canara Bank can be established by marking a copy of the order of this Court. This Criminal Revision stands dismissed. - Crl.RC.No.448 of 2020 And Crl. M.P.No.7507 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 16-8-2021 - Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.Prakash And Honourable Ms. Justice R.N.Manjula For the Petitioner : Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil For the Respondent : Mr.A.Ramesh Senior Counsel for Mr.A.Kaushik Narain Sharma ORDER P.N.PRAKASH, J. This criminal revision petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 12.03.2019 in Crl.M.P.No.21752 of 2018 in C.C.No.58 of 2016 pending on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Chennai an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2020057509424 Axis Bank, Vile Parle East Branch, Mumbai M/s. Mangal Royal Jewels 48,000.00 3. 192100050300905 TamilNad Mercantile Bank, Surat Smt.Saroj Devi Jain 3,09,869.57 4. 5511238478 Kotak Mahindra Bank Mumbai Central, Mumbai M/s. SriSri Mal Gems 3,168.74 5. 500011041643 ING Vysya Bank Nariman Point Branch Mumbai M/s. Cheiro Trading 5,490.00 6. 692011001093 ING Vysya Bank Cuffe Parade Branch Mumbai M/s. Madam Impex Private Limited. 18,451.00 7. 0932000100338401 Karnataka Bank Kandivali Branch Mumbai M/s. Yash Vikram Developers 10,58,611.16 8. 500011045581 ING Vysya Bank Nariman Point Branch Mumbai M/s. Pulkit Impex Private Limited 31,619.00 9. 913020011430431 Axis Bank, New Marine Lines, Mumbai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hus, the total amount that was provisionally attached by the Enforcement Directorate was ₹ 13,21,61,297/-. As regards the balance amount, it was found that Sukash Chandrasekar had purchased 9 luxury cars, 80 high brand watches, 1 i-pad, 2 diamond jeweleries. These items were also seized in a joint operation by the Central Crime Branch, Chennai and Delhi Police and were shown as case properties in CCB Crime No.64 of 2013. 2.7 While so, pursuant to the order dated 12.03.2014 passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.2900 of 2013, the case in CCB Crime No.64 of 2013 was transferred to the file of the Central Bureau of Investigation and the case was re-registered as Crime No.RC 6(E) of 2014 by the CBI, Bangalore on 30.05.2014. 2.8 In the interregnum, The provisional order of attachment was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 5(5) of the PMLA on 10.03.2014. The CBI completed the investigation in Crime No. RC 6(E) of 2014 and has filed a charge sheet in the Special Court for CBI cases, Chennai in C.C.No.3 of 2015 for the offences under Section 120-B r/w Section 419 and Section 420 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the said Act. In this case, the offences registered by the CCB in Crime No.64 of 2013, are indubitably offences mentioned in the schedule to the PMLA. Therefore, the Enforcement Directorate was justified in registering a case in ECIR.No.1 of 2016. The Central Crime Branch also swung into action by issuing directions under Section 102 Cr.P.C., for freezing the bank accounts so that the bank's money was safeguarded. The Enforcement Directorate also exercised powers under Section 5 of the PMLA to provisionally attach the amounts that were frozen by the banks on the directions of the Central Crime Branch issued under Section 102 Cr.P.C. The scheme envisaged in Chapter III of the PMLA is to safeguard the proceeds of a crime and the ultimate power to confiscate the amounts so attached is left to the Special Court that is trying the accused for the substantive offence under Section 3 r/w Section 4 of the PMLA. 5. In this case, as stated above, the Enforcement Directorate has filed a complaint in C.C.No.58 of 2016 before the Special Court for PMLA cases, Chennai, and non-bailable warrants are pending against 4 accused, viz. , A3, A10, A14 and A15 for the last 70 hearings. Can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as may be prescribed. 3-A. Manner of restoration of property during trial. - (1) The Special Court, after framing of the charge under Section 4 of the Act, on the basis of an application moved for restoration of a property attached under sub-section (1) of section 5, or, seized or frozen under section 17 or section 18 of the Act prior to confiscation, if it thinks fit, may, for the purposes of the second proviso to sub-section (8) of section 8 of the Act, cause to be published a notice in two daily newspapers, one in English language and one in vernacular language, having sufficient circulation in the locality where such property is situated calling upon the claimants, who claim to have a legitimate interest in such property or part thereof, to submit and establish their claims, if any, for obtaining restoration of such property or part thereof. 9. It may be pertinent to state here that the second proviso to Section 8(8) of the PMLA was included by Act 13 of 2018 with effect from 19.04.2018 and therefore, we doubt as to whether this amendment would ever apply to the claim of Canara Bank, as Canara Bank has been claiming this amount from 04.11.2016 when they fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subject matter of attachment under the PMLA, a sum of ₹ 4.60 crores has been directed to be disbursed to Mangal Royal Jewels and Mangal Bullion Private Limited by a Division Bench of this Court in C.M.A.Nos.1581 and 1582 of 2017 by order dated 29.08.2019 that has been passed by a Division Bench. To be more precise, the operative portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: 7. Having heard the submissions of the learned Additional Solicitor General and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, we are of the view that the submission made with respect to the statement made by Mr.Sukash Chandra Shekar pertains to only a sum of ₹ 46,69,000. Similarly in respect of the other amount of ₹ 51,25,000, there is a RTGS transaction. Thus, the appellate tribunal's findings in this regard cannot be found fault with. The appellate tribunal has rendered the above decision by considering the materials available on record. However, we find that a specific averment has been raised by the appellate in the complaint that the total amount of ₹ 4,60,94,825.97 is also the proceeds of the crime. The final adjudication in this matter is to be done by the trial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
