TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 894
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sha was the Chief Manager. Future Techniks represented that they are likely to get a contract from the Karnataka Government relating to 15,000 vending machines of sanitary napkins and 15,000 vending machines of condoms. One Sukash Chandrasekar introduced himself as Jayakumar to Balasubramanian, claimed himself to be an IAS Officer in the Karnataka Government and assured that he would get the said contract for Future Techniks. 2.3 It appears that Jagadeesha, in collusion with Balasubramanian and Sukash Chandrasekar, had released a sum of Rs. 19.70 crores between 08.02.2013 and 19.03.2013 and the loan amounts that were sanctioned from time to time were siphoned off to several companies. These loans, according to the prosecution, did not have the approval of the competent authorities and were sanctioned by Jagadeesha, Chief Manager, in collusion with the Directors of Future Technik. 2.4 The Circle Office of Canara Bank smelt a rat and on a complaint given by Nallasivam, Deputy General Manager, Canara Bank, the Central Crime Branch, Chennai, registered a case in Crime No.64 of 2013 on 19.03.2013 for the offences under Sections 406, 409 and 420 IPC against Jagadeesha, Balasubramanian ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....00 Total Amount (In Rupees) 13,21,61,297.94 2.5 Contemporaneously, the Enforcement Directorate registered a case in ECIR.No.01 of 2013 on 26.03.2013 under the Prevention of Money- Laundering Act (for brevity "the PMLA") and took up investigation of the case. 2.6 On 18.09.2013, the Enforcement Directorate passed an order of provisional attachment under Section 5(1) of the PMLA of the amounts lying in the 20 accounts that have been set out above. Thus, the total amount that was provisionally attached by the Enforcement Directorate was Rs. 13,21,61,297/-. As regards the balance amount, it was found that Sukash Chandrasekar had purchased 9 luxury cars, 80 high brand watches, 1 i-pad, 2 diamond jeweleries. These items were also seized in a joint operation by the Central Crime Branch, Chennai and Delhi Police and were shown as case properties in CCB Crime No.64 of 2013. 2.7 While so, pursuant to the order dated 12.03.2014 passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.2900 of 2013, the case in CCB Crime No.64 of 2013 was transferred to the file of the Central Bureau of Investigation and the case was re-registered as Crime No.RC 6(E) of 2014 by the CBI, Bangalore on 30.05.2014. 2.8 In the inter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cement Directorate has filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 3. Heard Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the Enforcement Directorate and Mr.A.Ramesh, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. A. Kaushik Narain Sharma, learned counsel on record for Canara Bank. 4. The commission of an offence mentioned in the schedule to the PMLA can trigger an investigation by the Enforcement Directorate under the said Act. In this case, the offences registered by the CCB in Crime No.64 of 2013, are indubitably offences mentioned in the schedule to the PMLA. Therefore, the Enforcement Directorate was justified in registering a case in ECIR.No.1 of 2016. The Central Crime Branch also swung into action by issuing directions under Section 102 Cr.P.C., for freezing the bank accounts so that the bank's money was safeguarded. The Enforcement Directorate also exercised powers under Section 5 of the PMLA to provisionally attach the amounts that were frozen by the banks on the directions of the Central Crime Branch issued under Section 102 Cr.P.C. The scheme envisaged in Chapter III of the PMLA is to safeguard the proceeds of a crime and the ultimate power to confiscate the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it is satisfied that the claimant has acted in good faith and has suffered the loss despite having taken all reasonable precautions and is not involved in the offence of money laundering: Provided further that the Special Court may, if it thinks fit, consider the claim of the claimant for the purposes of restoration of such properties during the trial of the case in such manner as may be prescribed." "3-A. Manner of restoration of property during trial. - (1) The Special Court, after framing of the charge under Section 4 of the Act, on the basis of an application moved for restoration of a property attached under sub-section (1) of section 5, or, seized or frozen under section 17 or section 18 of the Act prior to confiscation, if it thinks fit, may, for the purposes of the second proviso to sub-section (8) of section 8 of the Act, cause to be published a notice in two daily newspapers, one in English language and one in vernacular language, having sufficient circulation in the locality where such property is situated calling upon the claimants, who claim to have a legitimate interest in such property or part thereof, to submit and establish their claims, if any, for obtaining r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in provision to which it has been enacted as a proviso and to no other........" 14. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 12.03.2019 warranting interference. 15. At this juncture, it was brought to our notice by both sides that out of Rs. 13.21 crores that was the subject matter of attachment under the PMLA, a sum of Rs. 4.60 crores has been directed to be disbursed to Mangal Royal Jewels and Mangal Bullion Private Limited by a Division Bench of this Court in C.M.A.Nos.1581 and 1582 of 2017 by order dated 29.08.2019 that has been passed by a Division Bench. To be more precise, the operative portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: "7. Having heard the submissions of the learned Additional Solicitor General and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, we are of the view that the submission made with respect to the statement made by Mr.Sukash Chandra Shekar pertains to only a sum of Rs. 46,69,000. Similarly in respect of the other amount of Rs. 51,25,000, there is a RTGS transaction. Thus, the appellate tribunal's findings in this regard cannot be found fault with. The appellate tribunal has rendered the a....