Partly allowed

FPA-PMLA-2439/PTN/2018 of Gajendra Narayan v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna

ATFP11 Jan 2019FPA-PMLA-2439/PTN/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal restrained the Enforcement Directorate from taking possession of residential property without service of stay order and directed release of attached movable property upon deposit of appraised value.

What did the court decide?

Released movable properties on deposit of values; ordered appellant to deposit use and accommodation charges monthly for residential property; restrained premature possession of residence.

FPA-PMLA-2439/PTN/2018 of Gajendra Narayan v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2019)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS, PBPT ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Decision: 11th January, 2019

¶3

(1) MP-PMLA-4722/PTN/2018 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-2439/PTN/2018
Gajendra Narayan	…	Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna	…	Respondent
(2) MP-PMLA-4748/PTN/2018 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-2452/PTN/2018
Danik Lal Mandal @ Bhutali & Anr.	…	Appellants
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna	…	Respondent
(3) MP-PMLA-4759/PTN/2018 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-2453/PTN/2018
Gudiya Devi	…	Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna	…	Respondent
(4) MP-PMLA-4765/PTN/2018 (Stay) &
FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018		Page 1 of 12

¶4

FPA-PMLA-2456/PTN/2018

¶5

Smt. Rajanti Devi @ Rajanti Kumari & Ors. … Appellants

¶6

Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna … Respondent

¶7

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶8

For the Appellants	: Shri Puneet Mittal, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pawan Kumar Mittal, Advocate
For the Respondent	: Shri Neeraj Atri, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI G. C. MISHRA	: MEMBER

¶9

JUDGEMENT

¶10

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶11

The above mentioned four appeals have been filed against order dated 6^th July, 2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in O.C. No. 893 of 2018 arising out of Provisional Attachment Order No. 03/2018 dated 21.02.2018 in case file no. ECIR/PTZO/05/2017.

¶12

By the Provisional Order the following movable assets/immovable assets were attached:-

¶13

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶14

Page 2 of 12

¶15

A. IMMOVABLE ASSETS/PROPERTIES

¶16

Sl. No.	Sale Deed	Description of Properties	Value of the Property	Propertie acquired the name	s in of
i.	15521 dated	Khata No.-4, Plot No.-58,	Rs.	i. Rajanti	Devi
	15.12.2012	Thana No.-565, Mauza-	14,00,000/-	(D-3)	W/o
		Ratanua, Circle-Dev,	Stamp Duty-	Sandeep
		Area-04 Decimal	Rs. 84,100/-	Yadav (D-	1)
		alongwith construction,	Reg. & Other	ii. G	udiya
		Distt.-Aurangabad	charges-Rs.	Devi	(D-6)
			29,629/-	W/o D	hanik
			Total-Rs.	Lal M	andal
			15,31,729/-	(D-2)
ii	14232 dated	Khata No.-8, Plot No.-	Rs.	Rajanti	Devi
	10.10.2013	128, Thana No.-566,	15,00,000/-	(D-3)	W/o
		Mauza-Sahpur, Ward	Stamp Duty-	Sandeep
		No.-10, Area-05 Decimal,	Rs.	Yadav (D-	1)
		Distt.-Aurangabad	1,23,000/-
			Reg. & Other charges-Rs. 32,250/- Total-Rs. 16,55,250/-
iii	2916 dated	Khata No. 8, Plot No.-	Rs.	Rajanti	Devi
	11.03.2015	128, Thana No. 566,	5,40,000/-	(D-3)	W/o
		Ward No.-10, Mauza-	Stamp Duty-	Sandeep
		Sahpur, Area-1.82	Rs. 44,000/-	Yadav (D-	1)
		Decimal, Distt.-	Reg. & Other

¶17

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶18

Page 3 of 12

¶19

		Aurangabad	charges-Rs. 11,775/- Total-Rs. 5,95,775/-
iv	5661, dated	Khata No.-222, Khesra-	Rs.	Dhanik Lal
	12.07.2017	170, Plot No.-170, Thana	1,45,000/-	Mandal (D-2)
		No.-284, Mauza-	Stamp Duty-	brother of
		Dumranwan, Circle-	8,700/- Reg.	SandeepYadav
		Banke Bazaar, rea-18.75	& Other	(D-1)
		Decimal, Distt.-Gaya	Charges- 3,450/-
			Total Rs. 1,57,150/-
v	Advance	Category of Flat 1175,	Rs.	Gajendra
	Payments	2BHK, Smart Residency	10,68,400/-	Narayan (D-7)
	made		against	(son in law of
	Revanta		Membership	Sandeep
	Multistate CGHS Limited, Dwarka, New Delhi		No. SR51196	Yadav (D-2)
		Total	Rs.
			50,08,304/-

¶20

Movable Assets

¶21

B. Mutual Funds

¶22

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶23

Page 4 of 12

¶24

Sl. No.	Name of Mutual Fund	Investment	Value as	on
		made by	31.01.2018
i.	Axis Long Term Equity	Rajanti Kumari	Rs. 2,75,045/	-
	Fund (Folio No.	(D-3)
	91014656403) for Rs.
	2,00,000/- on
	27.01.2015

¶25

C. Vehicles

¶26

Sl.	Type of Vehicles	Owner	Date/Year of	Value
No.			Purchase
I	Honda Motorcycle (CBR 150 RG) BR 26J 6006	Rahul Kumar (D-4)	17.05.2016	Rs.1,40,341/-
ii	Yamaha Motorcycle (FZ-S) JH01-CE 4230	Rahul Kumar	16.11.2016	Rs. 96,390/-
iii	Passion Pro Motorcycle bearing no. BR26F 5880	Dhanik Lal Mandal (D-2)	2013	Rs. 58,000/-
iv.	Tractor bearing no. BR02GA-1049	Dhanik Lal Mandal (D-2)	2016	Rs. 6,33,457/-
v.	Maruti Brezza bearing no. JH09AH 9713	Dhanik Lal Mandal (D-2)	15.09.2017	Rs. 10,69,173/-
			Total	19,97,361/-

¶27

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶28

Page 5 of 12

¶29

D. Available Closing Balance in the bank accounts held in the name of Rajanti Kumari @ Rajanti Devi (D-3), Rahul Kumar (D-4) and others

¶30

Sl. No.	Name of Bank	Account Number	Account Holder	Available Balance as on 31.01.2018 (in Rs.)
i.	Punjab National Bank, Banke Bazaar, Gaya	2387000100026308	Dhanik Lal Mandal (D- 2)	1,722/-
ii	Punjab National Bank, Banke Bazaar, Gaya	2387000100158030	Gudiya Devi (D-6)	5,432/-
iii	Punjab National Bank, Aurangabad	7975000100011735	Rahul Kumar (D-4)	1,25,586/-
iv.	Punjab National Bank, Banke Bazaar, Gaya	2387000100095876	Gaurav Kumar (D-5)	1,51,026/-
v.	Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Banke Bazaar, Gaya	72160100130546	Dhanik Lal Mandal (D- 2)	69,479/-
vi	Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Banke Bazaar, Gaya	72160100171862	Gudiya Devi (D-6)	1,40,271/-
vii	Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Khiriyawan, Aurangabad	711101100077874	Gajendra Narayan (D- 7)	1,09,535/-

¶31

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶32

Page 6 of 12

¶33

viii	HDFC, Vihar, New D	Gagan elhi	50100132091399	Gajendra Narayan (D- 7)	92,265/-
ix	Canara Aurangabad	Bank,	3135108005475	Gaurav Kumar (D-5)	1,48,893/-
x	Bank of	India,	459110110004843	Rajanti	1,03,278/-
	Aurangabad			Kumari (D- 3)
xi	Syndicate	Bank,	74162010003285	Rajanti	159/-
	Aurangabad			Kumari (D- 3)
xii	Axis	Bank,	914010049104661	Rajanti	3,76,648/-
	Aurangabad			Kumari (D- 3)
				Total	Rs. 13,24,294/-

¶34

Total Value of Attachment

¶35

= A+B+C+D

¶36

= Rs. 50,08,304/-+Rs. 2,75,045/-+Rs. 19,97,361/-+ Rs. 13,24,294/= Rs. 86,05,004/-

¶37

The said order was confirmed by the impugned order dated 6^th July, 2018. The same was challenged by the above mentioned four appellants by filing in the registry dated 6^th August, 2018. The appeal was ordered to be listed first time for hearing on 14^th August, 2018. The advance copy served to the ED, however, before the date of hearing the respondent has taken the possession of certain movable/immovable properties. One of them is residential premises. The appellants have filed the affidavit in order to show that the wife and children of Vijay Yadav @ Sandeep Yadav were residing FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018 Page 7 of 12

¶38

in the immovable property when the possession was taken, the affidavits and documentary evidence have been filed in order to prove the same. Reply as per order dated 14^th August, 2018 has been filed by the respondent. During the course of the stay application the learned counsel for the appellant has restricted his relief in the stay application with regard to the following movable and immovable properties only, the details are given as under:

¶39

Appeal No.	Appellants	Property	Value as per in Rs.	Remarks
4765/2018	Rajanti Devi (appellant No.1)	Immovable property bearing Khata No. 4,	15,31,729/-	It is the residential property being
		Plot No. 58, Thana No. 565,		used as residence of
		Mauza Ratauna,		Rajanti Devi
		Circel Dev, District Aurangabad, Bihar, measuring 04 decimal, valued at (residential)		and her family. This property is co owned by Gudiya Devi. Appellant in appeal No. 4759/2018
4765/2018	Rahul Kumar (Appellant No.2)	Honda Motorcycle No. BR26J 6006	1,40,341/-	Presently valued at Rs.1,00,000/-
4765/2018	Rahul Kumar (Appellant No.2)	Yamaha Motorcycle No. JH01CE 42230	96,390/-	Presently valued at Rs.65,000/-
4748/2018	Dhanik Lal Mandal	Tractor No. BR 02 GA 109	6,33,457/-	Already seized Presently valued at Rs.2,50,000/-
4748/2018	Dhanik Lal Mandal	Passion Pro Motorcycle No. BR26F5880	58,000/-	Presently valued at Rs.20,000/-
4748/2018	Dhanik Lal Mandal	Maruti Brezza No. JH 09AH 9713	10,69,173/-	Financed by financial institution

¶40

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶41

Page 8 of 12

¶42

It is also submitted by senior counsel appearing on behalf of appellant that as per market value of the movable property, the appellants are ready to deposit with the respondent as the respondent has given its value as per rule. It is also stated by the appellant that as far as immovable property for the relief sought, the same is purchased from the funds of the appellants and not from the accused party i.e. her husband against whom serious allegations are there. The undertakings are given by the appellant not to dispose of the said property till the appeals are finally decided. It is pressed that these properties be restored subject to the same conditions, however, have no objection if attachment may continue.

¶43

The contentions of the learned counsel for the respondent is that at the time of taking the possession, no one is residing in the said property. The affidavit in this regard has also been filed. It is also stated by the counsel that the husband is facing trial in very serious offence who is absconding from law. Counsel for the appellant replied that the law would take its own course and they have no sympathy with him in any manner, but the offence, if any, committed by him should not be attributed to the family members. The children are of small age, their education issue is also involved. None of the relations are prepared to give shelter to them and no prejudice would cause if they be allowed to use the premises till the final order is passed. The undertaking given may also be accepted.

¶44

We have gone through the affidavit of IO who was also present before us as well as documents filed the appellant. Along with the affidavit, copy of Aadhar Card, copy of 10^th Class Certificate, relevant documents of gas connection receipt & other bills as well as details of electricity connection FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018 Page 9 of 12

¶45

installed in the property as well as charges of consumption of electricity are billed by the authorities. The similar is the position of gas connection bill. The seizure of the said property was made on 11.8.2018. In the newspaper, it was reported that the house was described as palatial house and the same was locked from inside.

¶46

The counsel for the appellant has also produced the photographs of the articles left in the said house which would show that the appellant Smt. Rajanti Devi and family were residing in the said house. After taking the possession of the house by the respondent, the appellant and her family members are residing in one of the relations or her sister house. It is evident that the family is facing great hardship as there is no other place to live.

¶47

It is the case of the appellant that the house was not purchased from the proceed of crime. It is admitted by all the appellants that serious charges are levelled against him and the same should be dealt as per law for which they have no objection. With regard to immovable property is concerned, they shall not dispose of till the final decision of the appeal, the same be restored to the original position of the appellant Smt. Rajanti Devi. The undertaking is accordingly accepted.

¶48

The documents would show that the appellant and her family members were residing in the said house. No useful purpose would be served if the said property is lying vacant for number of years when the trial against her husband is concluded, but on the other hand, the

¶49

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶50

Page 10 of 12

¶51

appellant is prepared to deposit the reasonable use and accommodation charges for residing in the said property.

¶52

The respondent on the date of taking the possession was fully aware that the appeal is coming up for hearing for consideration on 14.8.2018, however, the possession was taken prior to the hearing of the admission of the appeal. The appellant has only come to know about the same on 13.8.2018.

¶53

As far as movable properties are concerned, the IO and the counsel was unable to provide the details of the valuation of said properties. We are of the view that the value of the same are reasonably offered by the respective appellants no. 2 and 3 as well as Dhanik Lal Mandal, except the value of the movable property as per the suggestion of the appellant.

¶54

The proposal given by the learned counsel with regard to one of the movable properties and other properties is allowed. The said properties are released accordingly subject to the deposit of amount suggested by the appellant with the respondent within a period of eight weeks with the respondent.

¶55

With regard to immovable property is concerned where the appellant Smt. Rajanti Devi and her family members are residing, the value of the said property as per respondent is Rs.15,31,729/-. We direct that Smt. Rajanti Devi shall deposit a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) as use and accommodation charges every month on 7^th day of calendar month with the respondent. As far as arrears from the date of FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018 Page 11 of 12

¶56

impugned order i.e. from July to December, 2018 is concerned, the same shall be deposited by the appellant within eight weeks from today.

¶57

The properties which are attached are accordingly released forthwith.

¶58

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶59

(G. C. Mishra) Member

¶60

New Delhi, 11^th January, 2019

¶61

‘skb’

¶62

FPA-PMLA-2439, 2452-2453 & 2456/PTN/2018

¶63

Page 12 of 12

FPA-PMLA-2439/PTN/2018 of Gajendra Narayan v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-2439/PTN/2018 of Gajendra Narayan v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Patna

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