Seizure and retention of cash upheld where admissions and bank entries establish nexus to illicit receipts; procedural supply intact.

Seizure and retention of cash discovered during search is sustainable where recorded admissions and contemporaneous bank statement entries indicate receipts linked to licence-related illegality and the appellants fail to provide a satisfactory explanation for large cash holdings; accordingly the seizure and retention were upheld. Procedural objections alleging non-supply of the reasons to believe, show cause notice and relied documents were rejected on the documentary record showing service of the application, reasons and relied documents, so no procedural infirmity vitiated the confirmation order.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the seizure and retention of cash discovered during search is sustainable in view of the appellants' explanations as to the source of funds and admissions on record; (ii) Whether alleged procedural defects, including non-supply of reasons to believe, show-cause notice and relied-upon documents, vitiate the order confirming seizure and retention.

Issue (i): Whether the seizure and retention of Rs. 93,50,000/- is legally justified having regard to the appellants' disclosures and other material on record.

Analysis: The particulars of withdrawals and cash ledgers were examined alongside bank statements and certificates; recorded entries in bank statements and admissions in the recorded statements indicate receipts described as for licence or licence fee from defence personnel. The pattern of withdrawals and the absence of satisfactory explanation for accumulation and retention of large cash balances at residence were weighed together with the recorded admissions and supporting entries, leading to an assessment of whether a predicate offence and money-laundering nexus were established.

Conclusion: The Tribunal found the explanation for the source and retention of the cash unsatisfactory and held that materials, including admissions and bank entries, established a nexus with illegal licence-related receipts; accordingly the seizure and retention of the cash was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the impugned order is vitiated by non-supply of the reasons to believe, the show-cause notice, or relied-upon documents.

Analysis: The record was reviewed for service dates and contents of the application under Section 17(4) and the show-cause notice accompanied by reasons to believe. The chronology in the file indicates service of the application and that the relied-upon documents and reasons to believe were provided with the show-cause notice; the alleged non-supply was found contrary to the documentary record relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority.

Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that there was no failure to supply the reasons to believe or the relied-upon documents and that no procedural breach vitiated the order confirming seizure and retention.

Final Conclusion: The substantive and procedural challenges to the Adjudicating Authority's order were rejected, and the appeals were dismissed while permitting the seizure and retention to remain subject to the final outcome of the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: Where admissions and contemporaneous bank entries indicate receipt of funds connected to the alleged illegality and explanations for large cash holdings are not satisfactorily accounted for, seizure and retention under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 may be sustained; procedural invalidity is not established where the record shows service of reasons to believe and relied-upon documents.

---