Allowed

FPA-PMLA-1545/CHN/2016 of Shri a. Seeni @ Seenivasan v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

ATFP8 Mar 2018FPA-PMLA-1545/CHN/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal allowed appeals filed by three appellants seeking release of properties attached under the PMLA. The Tribunal accepted that the appellants had been acquitted of charges under Sections 3/4 of PMLA and CrPC Section 235(1), holding that attached properties must be released forthwith.

What did the court decide?

The appeals are allowed and all attached properties are directed to be released forthwith.

FPA-PMLA-1545/CHN/2016 of Shri a. Seeni @ Seenivasan v/s The… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2018)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Decision: 08.March, 2018

¶3

MP-PMLA-3786/CHN/2017 (Misc) FPA-PMLA-1545/CHN/2016 Shri A. Seeni @ Seenivasan … Applicant MP-PMLA-3788/CHN/2017 (Misc) MP-PMLA-3382/CHN/2017 (A.D) MP-PMLA-2930/CHN/2016 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1548/CHN/2016 Smt. S. Vasuki … Applicant MP-PMLA-3787/CHN/2017 (Misc) MP-PMLA-2929/CHN/2016 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1547/CHN/2016 Smt. S. Sugumari … Applicant Versus

¶4

The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai … Respondent

¶5

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶6

For the appellant	: Shri M.P. Parthiban, Advocate
For the respondent	: Ms. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH SHRI ANAND KISHORE	: CHAIRMAN : MEMBER

¶7

JUDGMENT

¶8

MP-PMLA-3786-3788/CHN/2017 (Misc) in FPA-PMLA-1545 & 15471548/CHN/2016

¶9

The above mentioned three appeals have been filed by Shri A. Seeni, Smt. S. Vasuki and Smt. S. Sugumari, Appellants against the order dated 17.10.2016 passed by the Adjudicating Authority. It is submitted that the appellant herein preferred an appeal against the order dated 17.10.2016

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1545 & 1547-1548/CHN/2016

¶11

Page 1 of 6

¶12

passed by Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA 2002 in O.C No. 601 of 2016 in PAO No. 11/2016 dated 26.04.2016 [ECIR No. 04//MDSZO/PMLA/2014 dated 23.07.2017].

¶13

The case against the appellant is that an FIR NO. 140/2013 was registered on 18.06.2013 in the Natham Police Station, Natham, Dindigul District, Tamil Nadu against Shri A. Seenivasan (D-1) @ Seeni, Smt. S. Sugumari (D-3), Smt. S. Vasuki (D-2), Shri Muthupandi, Shri Selvam, Shri Kasimayan, Shri Senthil and Shri Selvam for commission of offence in terms of Sections 8(c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (c ) r/w 25 & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶14

During the course of investigation under PMLA, Natham Police has thereafter filed final report u/s 173(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure on 23.11.2015 in the said FIR No. 140/2013. In another FIR No. 82/2015 registered against Sh. A. Seeni (d-1) and his both wives r/w 20 (b) (ii) and 25 of NDPS Act.

¶15

Immovable Properties - A

¶16

Sl. No.	Property Description	Value as per Document	Property holder Name
1.	Survey No. 297/1B2, 297/1B1 (1 acre and 25.50 cent plot) yan Kottayur Village, Natham Sub- Division, Dindigul District, Tamilnadu.(DocNo.575/2007)	Rs. 92,000/-	Smt. S. Sugumari W/o Shri A. Seeni @ Seenivasan
2.	Survey No. 297/1B2, 297/1B1, 197/1A2 (1 ace and 8.50 cent plot), Ayan Kottayur Village, Natham Sub-Division, Dindigul District, Tamilnadu. (Doc No. 1011/2013)	Rs. 1,30,000/-	Smt. S. Sugumari W/o Shri A. Seeni @ Seenivasan
3.	Survey No. 375B, New Survey No. 375/13 having Door No. 1/145/1, Ayan Velampatti Village, Natham Sub-Division,Dindigul District,	Rs. 2,00,000/-	Smt. S. Vasuki W/o Shri A. Seeni @ Seenivasan

¶17

FPA-PMLA-1545 & 1547-1548/CHN/2016

¶18

Page 2 of 6

¶19

	Tamilnadu.(DocNo. 1011/2013)
4.	1000 sq. ft. plot with a house situated at Ayan Velampatti Village (Doc No. 1681/2010)	Rs. 1,29,000/-	A land measuring 1000 sq. ft. with a house measuring 550 sq. ft. owned by his mother –in – law late Smt. Sulochana was given to his second wife Smt. Vasuki, as a gift through partitiondeed.

¶20

Movable Properties - B

¶21

Sl. No.	Property Description	Value	Name of Owner	Source of Income
1.	Chevrolet Tavera B3 bearing Reg. No. TN -57-AB- 2423.	Rs. 7,88,000/-	Smt. S. Vasuki W/o Shri A. Seeni @ Seenivasan	A. Seeni @ Seenivasan stated that an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- was used from the maturity amounts of Rs. 1,51,347/- and Rs. 1,50,631/- LIC Money Back Policies taken by his wives Smt. Sugumari and Smt. Vasuki respectively fro purchase of the car and the balance amount of Rs. 4,95,000/- was paid out of loan sanctioned by Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Ltd. in the year 2010.

¶22

During the pendency of the appeal, the present application has been filed by the appellant for setting aside the attachment of the properties. Smt. S. Vasuki is the second wife of A. Seeni and Smt. S. Sugumari is the first wife of A. Seeni.

¶23

It is stated in the application that the FIR No. 725/2010 dated 27.12.2010 was taken up as Calendar Case No. 75 of 2011 before the Additional Special Court for NDPS and the Appellant Seeni @ seevasan was

¶24

FPA-PMLA-1545 & 1547-1548/CHN/2016

¶25

Page 3 of 6

¶26

acquitted by order dated 19.03.2015 which is annexed at ANNEXURE A15 in the appeal.

¶27

It is further submitted that the FIR NO. 140/2013 dated 18.06.2013 was taken up as Calendar Case No. 52 of 2016 before the Additional District Judge and all the Appellants were acquitted by order dated 1.07.2017. The FIR No. 82/2015 dated 19.02.2015 was taken up as Calendar Case No. 160 of 2015 before the Additional District Judge and all the Appellants were acquitted by order dated 29.09.2016.

¶28

The copies of the order of acquittal dated 19^th March, 2015, 1^st July, 2017 and 29^th September, 2016 are placed on record by the appellant. It is a matter of fact that the Appellants were acquitted by the Ld. Trial Court in all the three cases. It is submitted when the acquittal in C.C. No. 75 of 2011 by order dated 19.03.2015 was appraised before the Adjudicating Authority, the Ld. Authority has given its finding in Para 5 internal page 30 that the present PAO was based on the FIR No. 140/2013 and the same has not resulted in acquittal.

¶29

It is submitted that all the Appellants are now acquitted in all the cases including FIR No. 140/2013, hence on this ground itself this Tribunal may allow the present appeals and release all the property of the appellants and drop all the proceedings under PMLA Act. Learned counsel for the appellant is that despite the same, the attachment order was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. It might be possible that since the PMLA complaint was pending therefore the Adjudicating Authority has exercised

¶30

FPA-PMLA-1545 & 1547-1548/CHN/2016

¶31

Page 4 of 6

¶32

his discretion not to drop the proceedings but to continue with the attachment.

¶33

When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel for the appellants has produced the copy of the order dated 20^th December, 2017 passed in CC No. 05/2016 whereby the accused were acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. from the charges punishable u/s 3 r/w 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the properties which are attached by the authority of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 under Ex. P.40, Ex. P.41 is ordered to be released and directed to hand over the same with respective accused.

¶34

The accused were also acquitted from the charges punishable under Section 3 read with Section 4 of PMLA 2002 wherein it was further ordered that the properties of the accused which were attached by the said authority are acquitted u/s 235(1) Cr.P.C. from the charges punishable u/s 3 r/w 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the properties which are attached by the authority of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 under Ex. P.40, Ex. P.41 is ordered to be released and directed to hand over the same with respective accused.

¶35

The learned counsel for the respondent has not disputed the said facts. Under these circumstances, it appears from the acquittal order that all the appellants are acquitted pertaining to the FIR as well as charges punishable Section 3 or 4 of PMLA.

¶36

FPA-PMLA-1545 & 1547-1548/CHN/2016

¶37

Page 5 of 6

¶38

In view of above all the appeals are allowed. The properties which are attached by the authority are released forthwith.

¶39

As far as the direction for handing over the attached properties are concerned same to the said order has already been passed by the District Judge for CBI cases second Additional District Court Madurai by the judgment of 20^th September, 2017.

¶40

All appeals and pending applications are disposed of.

¶41

No Costs.

¶42

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

(Anand Kishore)

Member

New Delhi,

08. March, 2018.

‘K’

FPA-PMLA-1545 & 1547-1548/CHN/2016

¶49

Page 6 of 6

FPA-PMLA-1545/CHN/2016 of Shri a. Seeni @ Seenivasan v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1545/CHN/2016 of Shri a. Seeni @ Seenivasan v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases