IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, C.J., BIBHU DATTA GURU
Sourabh S/o Mr. A.L.Modi – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement – Respondent
JUGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, CJ.
1. Heard Mr. Harshwardhan Parganiha {MA No. 34/2025, 35/2025 and 37/2025}, Mr. Nikhil Varshney (through Video Conferencing), Ms. Palak Dwivedi and Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta {MA No. 41/2025, 44/2025 and 48/2025}, Mr. Shashank Mishra, Mr. Gagan Tiwari and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav {MA No. 48/2025, 49/2025, 50/2025 and 51/2025} and Mr. Abhuday Tripathi {MA No. 80/2025} learned counsel for the respective appellants. Also heard Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, learned counsel for the respondent/Enforcement Directorate (for short, the ED).
2. Since all these appeals filed under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, the PMLA), arise from a common order passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA, New Delhi, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
3. The appellant, in MA No. 34/2025, has prayed for the following relief(s):
“a. Allow the present Appeal and call for the entire records of the Appeal filed on behalf of the Appellant before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal, registered as FPA-PMLA-6158-RP-2023;
b. Pass an order setting aside the Impugned Final Order dated 05.12.2024 in FPA-PMLA-6158-RP-2023 where
Prem Prakash v. Union of India
Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India
State of A.P. v. V. Vasudeva Rao
Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh
Aslam Mohammad Merchant v. Competent Authority
Pavana Dibbur v. Directorate of Enforcement
Thakur Bhim Singh (Dead) by LRs & Another v. Thakur Kan Singh
B. Rama Raju v. Union of India
Haricharan Kurmi v. State of Bihar
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India
Union of India v. Madras Bar Association
Swiss Ribbons (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
The court upheld the attachment of properties as proceeds of crime under the PMLA, establishing that circumstantial evidence is sufficient where direct evidence of financial misconduct is elusive, re....
The court emphasized that in economic offences under the PMLA, bail is not granted unless the accused proves they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The allocation of coal does not constitute proceeds of crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act if no illegal gains are derived or shown, particularly after quashing of the related first ch....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.