Petition Against Money-Laundering Act Attachment Order Dismissed; Petitioner Granted Extra Time to Respond.

The HC of Madras disposed of a writ petition challenging a provisional attachment order under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002. The court found the challenge not maintainable, citing the petitioner's effective remedy under the Act. It granted the petitioner an additional four weeks to respond to the show cause notice and instructed the adjudicating authority to issue a speaking order on merits. The issue of subjective satisfaction was left open. The petition was disposed of with these directions, and no costs were awarded.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to order of provisional attachment under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002

In this judgment, the High Court of Madras addressed a writ petition challenging an order of provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002. The court noted the steps taken by the adjudication authority, including sending a complaint in accordance with Section 5(5) of the Act and issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner. The court referenced a previous Division Bench decision to emphasize that the challenge to the provisional attachment order was not maintainable as the petitioner had an effective remedy under the Act. The court granted the petitioner four more weeks to respond to the show cause notice and directed the adjudicating authority to pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with the law. The court also left open the issue of subjective satisfaction, including the reason to believe. Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of with the provided directions, and no costs were awarded.

---