TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 894
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t facilities, from Canara Bank, where one Jagadeesha 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,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 19. 91202008827115 Axis Bank, SV Road Branch, Mumbai M/s. Galaxy Trading Company 3,56,00,000.00 20. 911010053307695 Axis Bank, Bangalore Main Branch, Bengaluru Shri Sukash Chandrasekar 4,84,000.00 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.29....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....P.No.21752 of 2018 before the Special Court for PMLA cases for de-freezing the bank accounts and returning the same to the bank. This petition was allowed by the Special Court for PMLA Cases on 12.03.2019, aggrieved by which, the Enforcement 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 amount....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent to restore such confiscated property or part thereof of a claimant with a legitimate interest in the property, who may have suffered a quantifiable loss as a result of the offence of money laundering: Provided that the Special Court shall not consider such claim unless 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, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vs. Asst. Commissioner of Sales Tax and Others AIR 1955 SC 765, wherein, it has been held as under: "10 .......It is a cardinal rule of interpretation that a proviso to a particular provision of a statute only embraces the field which is covered by the main provision. It carves out an exception to the main 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 ....