Directorate Of Enforcement v. M/S Worldwide Oilfield Machine Pvt. Ltd And ORS

VPH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 563 OF 2019 Director of Enforcement ...

Appellant Vs.

M/s. Worldwide Oilfield Machine Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

...

Respondents *** Mr. Hiten S. Venegaonkar, for the Appellant.

Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w Neha Prashant i/b Parinam Associates, for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

Ms. Heena Rathore i/b Kulkarni & Associates, for Respondent No. 4.

Mr. Chandan Singh Shekhawat, for Respondent Nos. 6 and 7. *** CORAM : INDRAJIT MAHANTY, & A. M. BADAR, JJ.

DATE : MAY 3, 2019 PC :

1.

By this appeal, the Appellant sought to challenge the order dated 25th February, 2019 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, constituted under the SAFEMA, PMLA, NDPS & PBPT Act, in which following directions came to be given in paragraph 29, which reads thus:

"29. In the present appeals, counsel for the respondent and IO have confirmed before this Tribunal that major 1 / 3

part of the reasons to believe are incorporated in order of provisional attachment, then where is the difficulty. Thus, I direct that copy of the reasons to believe be supplied within one week to each of the appellants who shall be entitled to file the response, if any, three weeks thereafter."

2.

The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Enforcement Directorate does not intend to press any other reason apart from the reasons, communicated to the accused in the form of complaint or in the form of summons. He further contends that compliance of the directions of the Appellate Tribunal would tantamount exposing the reasons to believe to the accused. 3.

Dr. Chandrachud, learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 fairly submits that if the Union of India limits its case to those reasons of beliefs, of which communication is made to the accused in the form of complaint and the summons issued, he has no objection to set aside the impugned order. 4.

Having considered and as noted hereinabove, we are of the considered view that the grounds of beliefs on the basis of which proceedings have been initiated against the accused persons are said to have been communicated to the accused both in the 2 / 3

form of complaint as well as in the summons, and as submitted by the learned counsel for the Union of India that they intend to support the reasons which have been communicated. Consequently, we are of the considered view that in view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the parties, we set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 25th February, 2019 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal and allow the matter to proceed in accordance with law. With such observations, appeal is allowed to the extent noted hereinabove.

Sd/­ Sd/­ [A. M. BADAR, J.] [INDRAJIT MAHANTY, J.] Vinayak Halemath 3 / 3