Dr Pranav Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr. — Money Laundering | Delhi HC (2026)

Dr Pranav Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr. — Money Laundering | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both appeals (MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 89/2025 and 90/2025) disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for to move the same before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Misc. Appeals (PMLA) filed by the appellants are maintainable before the High Court of Delhi under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, given that the appellants are neither residents of Delhi nor working for gain in Delhi, and jurisdiction is claimed only on the ground that the Attorney through whom the appeals were filed works for gain in Delhi.

Court's answer

In the Court's view, invoking the jurisdiction of this Court solely on the ground that the Attorney through whom the appeals were filed works for gain in Delhi does not satisfy the requirement of Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA); consequently, the appeals were not maintainable before this Court on that basis, and on counsel's prayer they were disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to move them before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Misc. Appeal (PMLA) 89/2025 (Dr Pranav Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.) and Misc. Appeal (PMLA) 90/2025 (Dr. Amina Bano Ansari v. Union of India & Anr.), High Court of Delhi, joint order dated 12.05.2026 (Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, JJ.). On the respondents' objection that the appellants are neither residents of Delhi nor working for gain in Delhi and that the appeals are therefore not maintainable before this Court, appellants' counsel submitted that jurisdiction was being invoked only because the Attorney through whom the appeals were filed works for gain in Delhi. The bench held that this does not satisfy the requirement of Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). At counsel's juncture-prayer for leave to withdraw the appeals to move them before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction, the appeals were disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. No precedent cited; disposal effected within four numbered paragraphs.

$~50 and 51

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 89/2025 & CM APPL. 79617/2025, CM APPL. 79619/2025

DR PRANAV KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Ms. Rupali Singh, Advocate.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Standing Counsel, DOE with Mr. Aniket Kumar Singh, Advocate.

51.

MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 90/2025 & CM APPL. 79621/2025, CM APPL. 79623/2025

DR. AMINA BANO ANSARI .....Appellant Through: Ms. Rupali Singh, Advocate.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Tiwari, CGSC with Ms. Ayushi Srivastava, GP, Mr. Arpam Narwal, Mr. Kushagra Malik and Mr. Ujjwal Tyagi, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Standing Counsel, DOE with Mr. Aniket Kumar Singh, Advocate.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

O R D E R

% 12.05.2026

On an objection of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/05/2026 at 12:31:33

the respondents that the appellants are neither the residents of Delhi nor are they working for gain in Delhi and, therefore, these appeals would not be maintainable before this Court, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that jurisdiction of this Court was being invoked only because the Attorney through whom the appeals have been filed by these appellants, works for gain in Delhi.

In our view, the same would not satisfy the requirement of Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).

At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants prays for leave to withdraw these appeals to move the same before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction.

The appeals are accordingly disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

MAY 12, 2026 / vd/sk/as

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/05/2026 at 12:31:33