A single-judge High Court order directing the designated agency to decide on a filed money laundering complaint within two weeks and communicate the outcome within one week.
Direction to respondent No.2 to take a decision on the complaint within two weeks and communicate in writing within one week.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT WRIT PETITION No.30309 of 2016
ORDER:
Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No.1 and 2 to take immediate action on his complaint dated 25.10.2015 against respondent Nos.3 to 5 under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 under Part-A (Para-1) schedule offences.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already made complaint dated 25.10.2015 to respondent No.1, which was forwarded to respondent No.2. However, till date, no action has been taken by respondent No. 2 on the said complaint.
Keeping in view the averments made in the petition, and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I hereby direct respondent No.2 to take decision on the petitioner’s complaint dated 25.10.2015 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The decision taken shall be communicated in writing to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
In view of the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
2
Miscellaneous Petition pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without
costs.
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J
Dt:08.09.2016 usd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether directions should issue to respondent authorities to take action on an unhandled money laundering complaint.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
PETITIONER
RESPONDENT NO.1
RESPONDENT NO.2
RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 5
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
