TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 227
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2021 dated 09.03.2021 (Annexure No. 1) passed by respondent no. 4 with respect to the four sugar mills of the petitioner, and all other consequential proceeding arising thereof in respect of the petitioner; b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to the provisional attachment order no. 02/2021 dated 09.03.2021 passed by respondent no. 4 and not to unnecessary harass the petitioner." For the purpose of admission and interim relief sought in the writ petition, Sri Satya Prakash Singh, Learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Karunanidhi Yadav, Advocate submitted that the impugned provisional attachment order has been passed in violation of the provisions of Section 5 of the Act. The procedure, as required has not been followed prior to passing of the impugned order. Even no opportunity was provided by the concerned authority before passing the impugned order. It is further submitted that the entire controversy is related with the dis-investment policy of sugar mills in the State of U.P., which were sold to different companies through auction. Elaborating his arguments, he submitted that, a Public Interest Litigat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....other criminal case, Mohd. Wazid and Mohd. Javed were implicated and being aggrieved, they filed a Writ Petition No. 29757 (MB) of 2017 (Mohd. Wajid and Ors vs. State of U.P. and Ors.) and this Court interfered in the matter and passed an interim order dated 03.12.2019, staying the operation of order dated 04.04.2019, whereby a direction was issued to transfer the investigation of case crime no. 1409 of 2017, under Sections 420, 468, 471, 477A IPC and 629A of the Companies Act, 1956 lodged at P.S.-Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow to CBI. The case crime no. 1409 of 2017 also relates to seven of the closed sugar mills out of 21 auctioned sugar mills. He further stated that even Competition Commission of India in the year 2013 took cognizance and a case no. 01 of 2013 was registered against the petitioner and other companies. This case was based upon findings in the performance Audit Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India. The said matter was duly contested by the petitioners and other and after recording the findings in favour of the petitioner and others, the Competition Commission of India closed the proceedings vide order dated 04.05.2017. Sri Satya Prakash S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roperties involved in money-laundering and confiscated by the Central Government: Provided that where a notice under this sub-section specifies any property as being held by a person on behalf of any other person, a copy of such notice shall also be served upon such other person: Provided further that where such property is held jointly by more than one person, such notice shall be served to all persons holding such property. (2) The Adjudicating Authority shall, after- (a) considering the reply, if any, to the notice issued under sub- section (1); (b) hearing the aggrieved person and the Director or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf, and (c) taking into account all relevant materials placed on record before him, by an order, record a finding whether all or any of the properties referred to in the notice issued under sub-section (1) are involved in money-laundering: Provided that if the property is claimed by a person, other than a person to whom the notice had been issued, such person shall also be given an opportunity of being heard to prove that the property is not involved in money-laundering. (3) Where the Adjudicating Authority decides under subsect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion (1), or subsection (2), the Appellate Tribunal may, after giving the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, confirming, modifying or setting aside the order appealed against. (5) The Appellate Tribunal shall send a copy of every order made by it to the parties to the appeal and to the concerned Adjudicating Authority or the Director, as the case may be. (6) The appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal under subsection (1) or sub-section (2) shall be dealt with by it as expeditiously as possible and endeavour shall be made by it to dispose of the appeal finally within six months from the date of filing of the appeal. 42. Appeal to High Court.-Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal to him on any question of law or fact arising out of such order: Provided that the High Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of India has no force. He also stated that the impugned order of attachment is not in violation of interim order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, as the same imposes certain restrictions on the purchasers of sugar mills. Lastly, he submitted that all the pleas which have been raised by the petitioner before this Court can be raised by the petitioner before Adjudicating Authority under Section 8 of the Act and the Adjudicating Authority, as appears from Section 8(2), is under obligation to consider the same. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. Before we proceed to take up the issue of maintainability of writ petition, we feel it appropriate to advert, in brief the reason behind enacting the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which was enacted in the year 2002. This Act was brought in force w.e.f 01.07.2005. The reason for enacting this Act is to implement the political declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly held in the month of June, 1998 in which India was a Member. The statement of objects and reasons recognizes that money laundering, is a serious threat not only to financial system of country but also to its integ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal Rights and, (iv) where the vires of the Act is challenged. In the instant case, assailing the provisional attachment order No. 02 of 2021 dated 09.03.2021, no ground has been taken that the order has been passed by an incompetent authority or by an authority having no jurisdiction. In this view, it is not a case of lack of jurisdiction. Further, in this writ petition, the vires of the Act has not been challenged. In this case, Right to Property is involved. Right to property is a constitutional right, which is always subject to restriction imposed by law. Further, the Right to Property has not been included under Part-III of the Constitution of India, which deals with the Fundamental Rights. Article 300-A is under Chapter IV of Part-XII of Constitution of India and it provides Right to Property. Thus, this is also not a case of enforcement of Fundamental Right. On the other hand, this is a case of right over the property, which can efficaciously be adjudicated by Forums provided under the Act. So far as the plea of breach of natural justice, as raised by the counsel for the petitioner for entertaining the writ petition is concerned, we are of the view that the same is unsust....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e discretionary jurisdiction provided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the plea of violation of Principles of Natural Justice. Further, the Act itself does not provide any opportunity of hearing to the concerned party prior to passing of order of provisions attached under Section 5 of the Act. Rightly so as after the order under Section 5 of the Act, the aggrieved party has multi layered remedies under the Act. So far as the plea(s) related to recording of 'reasons to believe' while passing the provisional attachment order and other procedural irregularities/illegalities are concerned, the same are statutory infraction and being so the same can be pleaded before the Adjudicating Authority as also in the appeal(s) provided under Sections 26 & 42 of the Act. Regarding the arguments of the learned Senior Advocate, based on the facts related to the interim order of Hon'ble the Apex Court, political rivalry and finding of Competition Commission, we are of the view that it would not be appropriate for this Court to advert into the same and record finding(s), as it could prejudice the case of either of the parties before the Adjudicating Authority and other....