TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 523
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spondent Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Special Counsel with Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Panel Counsel with Mr. Kartik Sabharwal, Mr. Kanishk Maurya and Mr. Pranjal Tripathi with Mr. Anand Kirti, LC, ED Mr. Mayank Arora, AD, ED. JUDGEMENT HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. CM APPL. 23462/2025 In MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 12/2024 CM APPL. 23458/2025 In MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 13/2024 CM APPL. 23457/2025 In MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 14/2024 1. The present applications are preferred under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by the Appellants/Applicants, seeking directions in view of the continued freezing of their movable assets and bank accounts pursuant to proceedings initiated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA]. The App....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 24.07.2019. Pursuant thereto, the ED filed a complaint and undertook further investigation, culminating in the issuance of freezing orders under Section 17(1A) of the PMLA in respect of the bank accounts and investments held by the Appellants. Subsequently, on 26.08.2022, the ED filed a supplementary complaint elaborating on the findings of its investigation. 4. The allegations underlying the proceedings against Mr. Malvinder Mohan Singh and others pertain to the alleged siphoning of approximately Rs. 1,260 crores from Religare Finvest Limited [RFL] by orchestrating a complex conspiracy wherein unsecured loans were routed to entities under promoter control, ultimately resulting in their misappropriation and causing substantial wrongful....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4.05.2024, the Appellants have filed appeals under Section 42 of the PMLA before this Court, and during the pendency of the said appeals, have moved the present applications for consideration. 8. It is apposite to set out herein the grounds on which the Appellants/Applicants seek directions through the present applications, which are as under: (a) The primary contention of the Applicants, as set out in their respective applications, is that they are in urgent need of funds amounting to approximately Rs. 5 crores each, which they require to meet the costs of their future educational pursuits (undergraduate, postgraduate or MBA programs, depending on the age and academic stage of each Applicant) and to cover their daily sustenance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding to financial loss. ANALYSIS & FINDING: 9. The principal contention advanced by the Appellants in these applications is that they require access to their frozen funds to cover daily living expenses and to finance their intended educational pursuits. 10. Learned Counsel for the Respondent would point out that a similar prayer had previously been raised before the learned Appellate Tribunal, but was ultimately not pursued by the Appellants. 11. Though various arguments have been advanced, mainly in connection with the definition of "proceeds of crime" under Section 2(1)(u), in our opinion, for the purpose of adjudicating the present Application, we need not get into contentious questions of law. These applications can be adjud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion that she intends to pursue a master's degree by the end of this year or the next. 15. In response, the learned Counsel for the Respondent rightly submits that two of the three Applicants have failed to provide credible or substantive evidence establishing any active engagement in an admissions or enrollment process. While one Applicant has furnished a GMAC confirmation email, she has provided no supporting documentation, such as test scores, formal applications, or offer letters. 16. As for the Applicant in CM Appl. 23458/2025, the Respondent's Counsel correctly submits that her anticipated tuition fees, approximately Rs. 30 lakhs, can be sufficiently covered from funds already available in six bank accounts, which together hold ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y employed professionals. No plausible, compelling, or urgent necessity has been demonstrated to warrant the release of such large sums merely to cover daily sustenance or maintenance. 23. It is important to underscore that the freezing of the Applicants' properties by the ED has already been confirmed by the learned Adjudicating Authority under Section 8 (3) of the PMLA, and this confirmation has been upheld by the learned Appellate Tribunal in the impugned order. 24. The main appeals challenging the learned Appellate Tribunal's decision are currently pending before this Court and will be adjudicated on their merits. Should this Court ultimately find that the frozen properties are untainted, the Applicants will regain access to them.....