2022 (3) TMI 1643 - HC - Money Laundering

Legal Challenge Dismissed: Specific Case Restrictions Upheld Without Broad Precedential Impact on Adjudicating Authority

Directorate of Enforcement Versus Prakash Industries Ltd And Anr. & Hi Tech Mercantile Pvt Ltd And Ors.

HC in LPA 179/2022 and LPA 180/2022 addressed appeals challenging a previous order staying proceedings. The Court clarified its earlier observation was ... Staying the proceedings before the adjudicating authority - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the sentence used in the impugned order clearly shows that the same was passed in view of the grounds urged by the respondents and the particular facts of the case in view and it is an issue to be decided by the Court, it would not be proper to grant liberty to the adjudicating authority to independently rule on the questions which was raised before this Court. It is thus evident that the directions have been passed clearly in the facts of the present cases. Appeals and applications are disposed of. The Delhi High Court, in LPA 179/2022 and LPA 180/2022, addressed appeals challenging the Single Judge's order dated 3rd March 2022, which stayed proceedings before the adjudicating authority. The appellant limited relief to contesting the observation in para 3 of the impugned order, which stated: 'it would be inappropriate to grant liberty to the Adjudicating Authority to independently rule on the questions which are raised here.' The Court clarified that this direction was based on the specific grounds urged by the respondents and the particular facts of the case, emphasizing that it was not a general precedent. The Court held that the Single Judge's restriction on the adjudicating authority was justified under the circumstances, as the issues raised were to be decided by the Court. Consequently, the appellant did not press the appeals further, and the appeals and related applications were disposed of.