Dismissed

FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015 of Mr. J. B. Narassanavar v. The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP11 Dec 2023FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal disposed of an appeal against a Provisional Attachment Order under PMLA. The High Court had quashed the predicate criminal proceedings, which the Special Judge closed. While the Supreme Court dismissed the ED's SLP against quashing but reserved rights to revive proceedings if convictions occurred in the predicate appeal, the Tribunal held the present appeal did not survive.

What did the court decide?

Present appeal and pending applications disposed of; clarified that petitioner entitled to seek revival of proceedings if predicate offence appeal is allowed and respondents convicted.

FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015 of Mr. J. B. Narassanavar Vs. The Deputy… — Narcotics (NDPS) | ATFP (2023)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-83S8/BNG/2021 (Misc.) MP-PMLA-1886/BNG/2015 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015

¶3

Mr. J. B. Narassanavar... Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bengaluru... Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Repre	sentatives who appeared
For the Appellant	: Mr.Shekar G. Devasa, Adv. Mr. Thasmitha Muthanna, Adv.
For the Respondent	:Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv.
CORAM
SHRI G.C. MISHRA	:MEMBER
SHRIBALESH KUMAR	:MEMBER

¶5

11.12.2023

¶6

The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the order dated 22.06.2015 passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority in the matter of original compliant (OC) 434 of 2015 confirming the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) No.4/2015 dated 19.03.2015 in ECIR No.69/BGZO/2009-10 issued by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bangaluru.

¶7

During the course of pendency of the appeal proceedings before us an application along with affidavit was filed seeking permission to file additional documents and subsequent events u/s 26 of the PMLA, 2002 read with Rule 3 of the PML(A) Rules, 2005. The documents sought to be filed are the certified copy of the order dated 29.09.2022 passed by Honble High Court of Karnataka at Bangaluru in Criminal Petition No.9685 of 2022 filed by the present appellants against the respondent ED for inter alia

¶8

FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015Page 1

¶9

quashing of further criminal proceedings in SPL.C.No.59/2016 pending on the file of III Additional District 85 Sessions Judge & Special Judge, D.K., Mangaluru and the certified copy of the orders dated 15.04.2016 and 28.10.2022 passed by the Ld. Special Judge, D.K., Mangalore, in SPL.C.No.59/2016.

¶10

Heard both sides on the application. The aforesaid two documents are certified copies of Court orders. These two documents are public documents and are necessary for just and proper decision of the appeal. Hence, the application is allowed and the same are taken on record.

¶11

3.During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that against the order of Honhle High Court the respondent ED preferred Special Leave Petition (Criminal) bearing Diary No. 13442/2023 and submitted that the said SLP was dismissed on 03.07.2023 and that it has attained finality and binding on both the parties. It is further submitted that appropriate order may be passed to dispose of the present appeal in the light of the orders passed by Honhle Supreme Court of India, Honhle High Court of Karnataka & the Ld. Special Judge under PMLA.

¶12

4.The Ld. Counsel for the respondent also submitted that appropriate order may be passed.

¶13

5.Heard and perused the orders placed on record. On perusal of the certified copy of the order passed by the Honhle High Court, Karnataka at Bengaluru, it appears that the present appellants have preferred the Criminal Petition No.9685/2022 inter alia for quashing of the criminal proceedings in Special Case No.59/2016 pending on the file of III Additional District 8b Sessions Judge 6b Special Judge, D.K., Mangaluru.

¶14

FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015

¶15

The HonTDle High Court allowed the Criminal Petition No.9685/2022 with a detailed order dated 29.09.2022 in which his lordship quashed the proceedings in Special Case No.59/2016 pending before III Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, D. K. Mangaluru.

¶16

6.Being aggrieved with the order of Hon"ble High Court the Enforcement Directorate preferred Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No! 13442/2023.

¶17

The order of Honttle Supreme Court is provided and the same is taken on record.

¶18

The Honble Supreme Court upon hearing the counsel made the following order dated 03.07.2023 :-

¶19

"Delay condoned.

¶20

We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order and, therefore, the special leave petition is dismissed. However, we clarify that in case the appeal preferred in the predicate offence is allowed and the respondents are convicted, the petitioner would be entitled to seek revival of the proceedings in question. Pending applicationfs^, if any, shall stand disposed of."

¶21

7.It is also seen from the certified copy of the order passed by the Ld. Ill Additional District 8b Sessions Special Judge, D.K. Mangalore under PMLA, 2002 in Sp.C.No. 59/2016, vide order dated 28.10.2020 closed the further proceedings on the basis of the copy of the order dated 29.09.2022 in Crl.P.No. 9685/2022. The said order is reproduced herein below :-

¶22

"Accused No.l is present. Accused Ho.2 is absent. EP filed. Allowed.

¶23

¶24

FPA-PMLA-99O/BNG/2O15Page 3

¶25

The counsel for accused produced copy of the order dated 29.09.2022 in Criminal Petition Nb.9685/2022. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaturu has quashed the proceedings of present case. Therefore, further proceedings of this case is closed and file is closed. The bail-bonds of accused stand cancelled.^

¶26

8.In the light of aforesaid developments and finally closing of the prosecution complaint, the present appeal does not survive. Accordingly, the present appeal and the pending applications are hereby disposed of.

¶27

9.However, it is clarified that in the event the appeal preferred in the predicate offence is allowed and the respondents are convicted, the petitioner would be entitled to seek revival of the present proceedings in question.

¶28

Registry is directed to send the copy of this Order to the parties. The record be consigned to record room after due compliance. , (Balesh Kumar) (G.C. Mishra) Member Member New Delhi, 11th December, 2023 'AM'

¶29

F 'A-PMLA-990/BNG/201S

FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015 of Mr. J. B. Narassanavar v. The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-990/BNG/2015 of Mr. J. B. Narassanavar v. The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases