9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Zonal Office on 08.01.2025 under Section 17 (1-A) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (herein referred as PMLA Act) thereby seizing the BMW Car of the Company and also freezed the account of the petitioner-company. 2. The case of the petitioner is that on 07.01.2025, one of the Directors of the petitioner's company, namely, S. Subhashree Priyadarsini had visited to her father's house located at Sector 6, CDA, Cuttack in the company's BMW Car bearing Registration No. OD-05-BR-9999. When the car was parked outside the house of the father of Subhashree Priyadarsini, the opposite party No.3, the Assistant Director of Enforcement, Bhubaneswar Zonal Office conducted search and seizure under Section 17 of the PMLA Act in the house of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is involved in various criminal activities i.e. extortion, illegal mining activities, selling and transportation of the dangerous explosive substances etc., for which he has been prosecuted. Since Ratikanta Rout is prosecuted for schedule offence, it is alleged that he has generated and acquired proceeds of crime, PMLA Act is invoked against him. 7. During investigation of the PMLA case, it appears that the Enforcement Directorate found out some nexus with Shri Chandra Sekhar Samal, Director of M/s. Shree Constructions. Therefore, a search and seizure was conducted in the house of Shri Chandra Sekhar Samal. It also reveals that Subhashree Priyadarsini, one of the Directors of the petitioner's company happens to be the daughter of Chandra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the proceeds of crime and acquisition of luxury car of the petitioner's company. The reply does not disclose anything to link the petitioner's company with either Ratikant Rout or Chandra Sekhar Samal. Merely because one of the Directors of the petitioner's company happens to be a daughter of one of the alleged accused in the PMLA Act, the company which is a juristic person cannot be roped in to the alleged crime under the PMLA Act. Therefore, invocation of Section 17 of the PMLA Act against the petitioner's company is misconceived, arbitrary and an act of colourable exercise of power. 9. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the recent judgment of this Court passed in Lakshman Srinivasan vrs. Republic of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of information in his possession, have reason to believe that such person has committed acts relating to money laundering and there is need to seize any record or property found in the search. Such belief of the officer should be recorded in writing. Sub-section (1A) to Section 17 of PMLA provides that the Officer Authorised under sub-section (1) may make an order to freeze such record or property where it is not practicable to seize such record or property. Sub-section (2) provides that after search and seizure or upon issuance of a freezing order the Authorised Officer shall forward a copy of the reasons recorded along with material in his possession to the Adjudicating Authority in a sealed envelope. Sub-section (4) provides th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s vested with such power and the Adjudicating Authority is also kept in the loop. In the instant case, the procedure contemplated under Section 17 of PMLA to which reference is made above has not been followed by the Officer Authorised. Except issuing the impugned communication dated 15.05.2020 to AML Officer to seek freezing, no other procedure contemplated in law is followed. In fact, the impugned communication does not even refer to the belief of the Authorised Officer even if the same was recorded separately. It only states that the Officer is investigating the case and seeks for relevant documents, but in the tabular column abruptly states that the accounts have to be 'debit freezed/stop operations. It certainly is not the requirem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the present case, the Seizing Authority has absolutely not applied his mind rather mechanically went ahead and seized the BMW car which appears to have been purchased by availing bank loan by the petitioner's company. Enough documents have been placed on record to establish that the car has been purchased by the petitioner's company by availing bank loan. On the contrary, no materials have been brought on record by the Enforcement Directorate to show that the acquisition of car is through the proceeds of crime. Similarly, no nexus or link could be established by the Enforcement Directorate with the petitioner's company. Hence, freezing of the bank account of the petitioner's company is also appears to be illegal. Therefore, at this stage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
