Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1254/BNG/2016 of Sri Prasanna Rao v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore

ATFP16 Feb 2018FPA-PMLA-1254/BNG/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal considered appeals by individuals acquitted by a Special Court under the PMLA. Counsel argued the State did not file appeals and no new material was recovered. The court reserved orders while directing appellants to file copies of pending Lokayukta complaints and charges.

What did the court decide?

Reserved orders; directed appellants to file copies of pending Lokayukta complaint and charge sheet within three weeks.

FPA-PMLA-1254/BNG/2016 of Sri Prasanna Rao v/s The Joint Director… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2018)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-2838/BNG/2016 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1494/BNG/2016
Sri Laxminarayan	…	Appellant
MP-PMLA-2839/BNG/2016 Stay FPA-PMLA-1495/BNG/2016
Ramchandra Rao	…	Appellant
MP-PMLA-2840/BNG/2016 Stay
FPA-PMLA-1496/BNG/2016
Sri Pandari	…	Appellant
MP-PMLA-2841/BNG/2016 Stay FPA-PMLA-1497/BNG/2016
Mallikarjun	…	Appellant
MP-PMLA-2842/BNG/2016 Stay FPA-PMLA-1498/BNG/2016
Smt. Nirmala Dodla	…	Appellant
FPA-PMLA-1254/BNG/2016
Sri Prasanna Rao	…	Appellant
Versus
The Joint Director
Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore	…	Respondent

¶3

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶4

For the appellant	: Shri Raj Kumar, C.A.
For the respondent	: Shri Atul Tripathi, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN

¶5

ORDER 16.02.2018

¶6

FPA-PMLA-1494-1498 & 1524/BNG/2016

¶7

The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been acquitted by the Special Court and the said order has

¶8

FPA-PMLA-1494-1498 & 1524/BNG/2016

¶9

Page 1 of 2

¶10

attained finality as no appeal filed by the state. It is also stated by him that the allegation made PMLA complaint filed by the respondent are same. There are no additional material recovered the by the respondent on any independent investigation carried out under the PMLA, 2002. Thus the appeals are liable to be allowed.

¶11

There is no denial on behalf of the respondent about the acquittal of the main appellant.

¶12

Order reserved.

¶13

In the meanwhile, the appellant is directed to file the copy of the complaint filed by the Lokayukta. A copy of the complaint filed under PMLA which is pending against the appellant and fair copy of the charge filed against the appellant within three weeks from today.

¶14

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶15

New Delhi, 16^th February, 2018. ‘K’

¶16

FPA-PMLA-1494-1498 & 1524/BNG/2016

¶17

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1254/BNG/2016 of Sri Prasanna Rao v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1254/BNG/2016 of Sri Prasanna Rao v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases