2025 (4) TMI 1791

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eign currencies, gold jewellery and bar from various defendants to whom notice was caused by the Adjudicating Authority. The appeal preferred by the appellant is limited to seizure of Foreign and Indian currencies for the value of Rs. 1,54,832.60 towards the foreign currency and Rs. 64,38,700/- being the Indian currency. Apart from the aforesaid, gold jewellery of the appellant were also seized on a search of the premises of the appellant at Elgin Road, Opposite Heart Line Hospital, Civil Lines, Prayagraj and currency of Rs. 8,09,400/- was seized on a search of the office premises of the appellant at Vinayak Solitaire, Civil Lines, Prayagraj. Apart from the aforesaid, the documents and digital devices were also seized during the course of s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ade to cause interference in the impugned order. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the respondent vehemently contested the appeal. It is submitted that the matter pertains to crime committed by Shri Ateeq Ahmad where even the applicant is involved. It is in the light of statement of Shri Ateeq Ahmad and other accused recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 ( in short "the Act of 2002"). 5. The appellant had taken advantage of Shri Ateeq Ahmad in securing the land on a cheaper price and after development, to pass on the benefit to Shri Ateeq Ahmad also. He was, thus, beneficiary of the crime committed by Shri Ateeq Ahmad and other accused in Allahabad otherwise in the State of Uttar Pradesh. 6. The Ld. Counsel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red the matter to the Adjudicating Authority under Section 17(4) of the Act of 2002. The Adjudicating Authority has allowed retention of the seized documents and the valuables. The appellant is aggrieved by it. 9. It is stated that documents and digital devices recovered from the appellant has been released after the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority. Thus, to that extent, appeal has become infructuous. So far as cash and gold jewellery recovered from the appellant and seized thereupon has not been released, rather, matter has been referred to the Income Tax Department, as is coming out from the documents placed on record by the appellant. According to the appellant, cash and jewellery are now remained subject matter of the....