Seizure of property under the PMLA must lapse after 365 days without a related prosecution complaint; the 'pendency' of proceedings involves a direct connection to the property seized.

JUDGMENT

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for the following reliefs:

"i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/direction/order declaring that the order dated 10.02.2021 passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority allowing Original Application bearing O.A. No. 404/2020 filed u/s 17(4) of PMLA, 2002 has ceased to have effect from date 11/02/2022 due to non-filing of prosecution complainant within 365 days as contemplated u/s 8(3)(a) of PMLA.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/direction/order to the Respondent/ED to release/return all the documents, records, digital devices, and gold & diamond jewelry as mentioned in the Panchanama/seizure memo dated 19/08/2020 and 20/08/2020."

Factual matrix

2. It is the case of the petitioner that, vide order dated 26.07.2017, passed by the learned National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (in short, `NCLT') in CA No.(IB)-202(PB)/2017, the petitioner was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (in short, `IRP') for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of M/s Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as `BPSL').

3. On 01.09.2017, the Committee of Creditors (in short, `CoC') for BPSL confirmed the appointment of the petitioner as the Resolution Professional (in short, `RP') for BPSL.

4. On 16.10.2018, the CoC also approved the resolution plan for BPSL, which was submitted by M/s JSW Steel Limited. The said plan was approved by the learned NCLT vide order dated 05.09.2019.

5. The petitioner claims that in the course of his functioning as the IRP and as the RP of BPSL, the petitioner unearthed fraud committed by the ex-promoters and directors of BPSL, for which he even filed a criminal complaint dated 07.02.2020 with the SHO, Thelkoloi Police Station, District-Sambalpur, Odisha, under Sections 419 ,420,465,467,468,469,471 read with Section 120-B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (in short, `IPC'). The petitioner also filed an application under Section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code , 2015 (in short, `IBC') for the fraudulent and wrongful trading, before the learned NCLT.

6. It is alleged that the Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi (in short, `CBI') registered an FIR/RC No.RCBDl/2019/E/0002 dated 05.04.2019 against BPSL, its Directors, and the other Key Managerial Persons, on allegations of offences committed under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420 , 468, 471 & 477A of the IPC, and Section 13 (2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner was neither named as an accused in the FIR nor was investigated by the CBI. He was neither summoned nor asked to join the investigation by the CBI in the said FIR.

7. Based on the said FIR, the respondent registered an Enforcement Case Information Report (in short, `ECIR') bearing no.ECIR/DLZ0-1/02/2019 dated 25.04.2019 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act').

8. The petitioner claims that he has duly co-operated with the investigations conducted by the respondent and his statement has also been recorded under Section 50 of the Act, on 13.09.2019, 30.09.2019 and 04.10.2019. He claims to have furnished information and documents from the records of BPSL which were in his custody while performing his duty as an RP of BPSL.

9. The petitioner states that a Provisional Attachment Order, bearing PAO no.11/2019 dated 10.10.2019 was passed attaching the p