TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1178
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Nagar Police Station, Bhubaneswar, Odisha against Sri Triveni Kumar Mohanty and others. (i) FIR No. 397/10, dated 27.12.2010 (ii) FIR No. 145/11, dated 28.04.2011 (iii) FIR No. 176/11, dated 26.05.2011 (iv) FIR No. 177/11, dated 26.05.2011 and lastly (v) FIR No. 09/12, dated 15.01.2012. 3. The following 04 charge sheet in pursuance to the FIRs were filed from time to time in the year 2011:- (i) Charge Sheet No. 236 dated 13.08.2011 (ii) Charge Sheet No. 325 dated 29.10.2011 (iii) Charge Sheet No. 181 dated 22.06.2011 (iv) Charge Sheet No. 240 dated 13.08.2011 4. The allegation against Triveni Kumar Mohanty, Managing Director of Stock Group of companies and others was for ruling out various alluring schemes and investment plans and collected huge amount of money from innocent public in the name of M/s Star Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., and other associate Companies/Firms namely M/s New Era Resources Pvt. Ltd., M/s Star Yogic and Leisure Ltd., M/s Star Concrete Pvt. Ltd. etc. by making false promise to provide residential houses in and outside Bhubaneswar as well as assuring high rate of interest. 5. Reference of different schemes floated by the Company was g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue number 5 11. The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that without filing of the charge sheet, the order of attachment was passed going contrary to section 5(1) of the Act of 2002. The attachment of the property can be made if the charge sheet has been filed under section 173 CrPC and not otherwise. In the instant case, no charge sheet was filed, yet attachment of the property was made going against section 5(1) of the Act of 2002. 12. The prayer was accordingly made to quash the order on the aforesaid ground. 13. The counsel for the appellant did not raised any other argument than referred to above and accordingly the counsel for the respondent was called upon to make their submissions. 14. The learned counsel for the respondent contest the appeal on all the grounds and their argument would be referred while recording the finding on each issue. Finding of the Tribunal First Issue 15. The appellant has challenged the impugned orders on the ground that even after lapse of years, the charge sheet in reference to the FIR's have not been filed and in absence of charge sheet, the commission of predicate offence remains only on assumption. 16. Before addressing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 2019, is, in fact, an enabling provision. It permits the Authority authorised to file a closure report before the Special Court in case it is of the opinion that no offence of money laundering has been made out, requiring filing of such complaint. This provision is only to dispel the doubt that in the event the person has been arrested by the officer authorised under Section 19 of this Act on the basis of material in his possession and having reason to believe and recorded in writing of being guilty of an offence punishable under this Act, but after the inquiry done by him in exercise of powers under Chapters V and VIII of the 2002 Act, he forms an opinion that no offence of money-laundering is made out, requiring filing of complaint, it is open to him to file a closure report before the Special Court disclosing that position. The proviso would, thus, come into play in such cases where the complaint is yet to be filed owing to the pendency of inquiry before the authorities, under Chapters V and VIII of the 2002 Act. In that view of the matter and more so keeping in mind the purposes and objects behind the enactment of 2002 Act, such a provision must be regarded as having reason....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot be less than of 30 lacs. It is stated that FIR was involving only Rs. 10 lakhs and therefore respondents could not have proceeded to record the ECIR when scheduled offence is not made out. The issue aforesaid was seriously contested by the respondent. He referred to a relevant document on record filed by the appellant himself where a reference of the total amount involved in the matter was referred to Rs. 200 crores. 27. The proceeds of crime calculated by the respondents have been valued much higher than Rs. 30 lacs, rather the immovable properties worth of Rs. 55,23,334/- were attached and apart from that the value of movable property is of Rs. 32,23,118/- which is much higher in value than required to make out a scheduled offence. It is necessary to clarify here that after registration of the FIR, the investigation revealed not only involvement of the accused for commission of offence but the amount is also involved herein. 28. In the instant case, the serious allegation exist against the appellant for collection of huge amount from the public in reference to different schemes floated by them. It was informed that the total amount involved is of Rs. 200 crores where innocen....