Dismissed

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 of Dinesh Kumar v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh

ATFP12 Sept 2024FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal filed under Section 26 of the PMLA challenged the impugned order retaining seized documents and freezing bank accounts. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, noting that while copies of relied-upon documents should be provided, the matter retains no finality on merits regarding the prosecution case.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to receive copies of relied-upon documents; appeal dismissed without deciding merits of case.

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 of Dinesh Kumar Vs. The Deputy Director… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2024)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI

¶2

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 Dinesh Kumar … Appellant

¶3

Versus

¶4

The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh

¶5

… Respondent

¶6

Advocates/Authorized	Representatives who appeared
For the Appellant	: Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Madhvi Khandelwal, Adv.
For the Respondent	: Mr. Arjun Sawhney, Adv. Mr. Rohan Bhambri, Adv.

¶7

CORAM SHRI G.C. MISHRA : MEMBER SHRI RAJESH MALHOTRA : MEMBER

¶8

FINAL ORDER 12.09.2024

¶9

Dictated by: Rajesh Malhotra

¶10

Present appeal u/s 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, is filed by the appellant against the impugned order dated 12.09.2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in Original Application No. 93/2017, whereby it allowed the respondent ED to retain/seize/freeze the documents, digital records, bank accounts etc., seized from the premises of various persons including the present appellant, during the search conducted on 07.04.2017. 2. In the present appeal, Ld. Counsel for appellant submitted that he is the proprietor of M/s Vision Procon, Director of Dream Heights Homes Pvt Ltd. and also owning a HUF in the name of Dinesh Kumar & Sons (HUF) and that a search was conducted by the respondent ED on premises of the present appellant and the following seizure was made:

¶11

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 Dinesh Kumarv. E.D., Chandigarh

¶12

¶13

Sr. No.	Premises searched	Outcome of the search
1	Business-cum-residential	Certain documents viz., Annexure- 1, (Pages 1
	premises of Shri Dinesh	to 34), Annexure II (Pages 1 to 30), Annexure III
	Kumar s/o Mr. Lahori Lal,	(Pages 1 to 39), Annexure IV (Pages 1 to 110),
	Proprietor of M/s Vision	Annexure V (Pages 1 to 116), Annexure VI
	Procon situated at 3086/1, Sector-47D, Chandigarh – 160047	(Pages 1 to 6) & Annexure VII (12 diaries & 1 stamp in the name of M/s Dreamers) were seized duringthe searches.

¶14

In view of the above search, the following bank accounts of the

¶15

appellant were frozen:

¶16

Bank Accounts

¶17

Sr. No.	Bank Name	Details of the Account holder	Account No.	Amount (in Rs.)
1.	Indian Overseas Bank	Dinesh Kumar Prop. M/s Vision Procon	28402000012935	2853.56
2.	Karnataka Bank	M/s Dinesh Kumar & Sons HUF	1462000100117401	4936.00
3.	State Bank of Patiala	Dinesh Kumar Prop. M/s Vision Procon	0065217110302	8716.62

¶18

The Ld. Counsel for appellant further submitted that the appellant has never performed active role in M/s Dream Height Homes Pvt. Ltd. and the appellant is a sleeping Director of the company. He further stated that the appellant had no direct or indirect nexus or relationship with any tainted asset or money in any manner, whatsoever and has never acted as agent of any person or business entity which are under investigation in the present proceedings. The implication of the appellant in the criminal case is without any factual basis and predominantly on the basis of untenable assumptions and conjectures.Prayer is accordingly made to allow the present appeal and thereby direct the respondent ED to release the above bank accounts and documents.

¶19

On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for respondent ED submitted that certain bank accounts were identified belonging to the accused

¶20

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018

¶21

Dinesh Kumarv. E.D., Chandigarh

¶22

¶23

and their associate companies as a result of information and also as a result of searches conducted by the respondent ED. The bank officials of Indian Overseas Bank main branch Chandigarh fraudulently intercepted messages and issued letter of conformity/letter of undertaking to the foreign banks for the Buyers Credit extended by them. This was done in collusion with the accused companies and their directors /proprietors and have caused loss to the bank to the tune of USD 47.86 million equivalent to approximately Indian Rs. 321 crores. He pointed out thedetails of fraudulent SWIFT messages through which liability was created against the Indian Overseas Bankqua the Proprietorship concern of appellant Mr. Dinesh Kumar i.e. M/s Vision Procon, which is detailed as under:

¶24

Sr. No.	Date of Swift Messages	Buyers Credit (BC) Reference No.	Applicant Name	Benefi Name	ciary	BC Account	Amount in USD	Due date of BC
1	20.07.2015	284/MISCIN/23/15	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,048,530	01 July 2016
2	03.08.2015	284/MISCIN/39/15	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,100,903	21 July 2016
3	03.08.2015	284/MISCIN/40/15	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	2,298,376	24 July 2024
4	11.08.2015	284/MISCIN/41/15	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,274,653	27 July 2024
5	08.01.2016	284/MISCIN/02/16	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,452,430	13 Dec 2016
6	25.01.2016	284/MISCIN/04/16	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,374,865	09 Jan 2017
7	25.01.2016	284/MISCIN/05/16	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,452,143	16 Jan 2017
8	05.02.2016	284/MISCIN/07/16	Vision Procon	Colour Wave Ltd	(HK)	PNB, Dubai	3,135,460	28 Jan 2017

¶25

Accordingly, he submitted that plea of appellant that he was sleeping director in M/s DreamHeights is of no significance, as in pursuance to conspiracy he defrauded Indian Overseas Bank as mentioned above. In view of the above, Ld. Counsel for respondent

¶26

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018

¶27

Dinesh Kumarv. E.D., Chandigarh

¶28

¶29

submitted that the various documents, properties, bank account, cash and lockers including foreign currency etc. were seized. The same are likely to be involved in money laundering and suspected to be the proceeds of crime. Prayer is accordingly made to dismiss the present appeal being devoid of any merits.

¶30

After hearing the rival submissions, we have given our thoughtful consideration to the same. The plea of the present appellant that he is not involved in any offence is without any merit in view of the allegations pointed out by Ld. Counsel for respondent as mentioned in para no. 3 above.

¶31

However, seeing the fact that prosecution complaint is already filed, the present appellant is entitled to the copies of all relied upon documents/seized material and he has right to apply for release of all un-relied documents (if any), if the same are not required for any further investigation.

¶32

In sequel to our observation in the preceding para, the present appeal is hereby dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. It is made clear that nothing expressed herein will affect the merits of prosecution case under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

¶33

Appeal Dismissed.

¶34

Pronounced on this 12^th Day of September, 2024.

¶35

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 Dinesh Kumarv. E.D., Chandigarh

¶36

¶37

(Rajesh Malhotra) (G.C. Mishra) Member

¶38

‘AB’

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 of Dinesh Kumar v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-2205/CHD/2018 of Dinesh Kumar v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh

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