Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, GAUTAM A.ANKHAD
Y. Shiva Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement through its Assistant Director – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
1. By the present petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner seeks a declaration that his arrest by the respondent no.1 (“ED”) on 13th August 2025 is illegal and violates his fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner further prays for quashing and setting aside the orders dated 14th August 2025, 20th August 2025 and all other orders passed in Remand Application No.1136 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (PMLA) and for a direction for his release from custody.
2. The petitioner joined the Vasai-Virar City Municipal Corporation (“VVCMC”) as a Deputy Director, Town Planning on 13th August 2010. Between 2019 and 2023, the following four First Information Reports (“FIR”) were registered at the Tulinj police station and Achole police station:
(i) FIR no.1348 of 2019 dated 26th November 2019 registered under sections 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”);
(ii) FIR no.195 of 2022 dated 26th April 2022 registered under section 420 of IPC;
(iii) FIR no.196 o
Judicial review of PMLA arrests limited to procedural compliance; 'reasons to believe' under s.19 valid on prima facie material like seized assets, statements; no need for naming in predicate FIRs; o....
The necessity of providing documented 'reasons to believe' at the time of arrest under Section 19 of PMLA is a statutory requirement that must be adhered to for the arrest to be lawful.
The court ruled that the arrest of the petitioner was unlawful due to insufficient evidence linking him to illegal mining, which is not a scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Ac....
The court upheld that arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was lawful as procedural requirements of Section 19 were sufficiently met, emphasizing limits of judicial review on subjectiv....
The court established the statutory right of the enforcement agency to conduct further investigation and file subsequent complaints without seeking prior permission, as empowered by the provisions of....
The court upheld the legality of the petitioner's arrest under the PMLA, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with statutory safeguards and the scope of judicial review.
The court upheld the legality of the arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, confirming compliance with statutory requirements, including timely communication of grounds for arrest.
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as there were no reasonable grounds for believing that she had committed an off....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
