DELHI HIGH COURT
MUKTA GUPTA, ANISH DAYAL
Harish Fabiani – Appellant
Versus
Enforcement Directorate – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. constitutionality of pmla provisions challenged. (Para 1) |
| 2. supreme court decision impacts ongoing petitions. (Para 2) |
| 3. predicate offence quashed affects ecir validity. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. arguments against sustained ecir and proceedings. (Para 5) |
| 5. respondents contest argument on predicate offences. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 6. supreme court affirms quashing logic. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 7. disclosure does not establish predicate felony. (Para 23) |
| 8. court quashes ecir and related proceedings. (Para 24) |
JUDGMENT
Anish Dayal, J. These writ petitions were heard together and have sought similar prayers. For ease of reference, various reliefs sought in each of these writ petitions (and accompanying applications), presented in different permutations and combinations, could effectively be enumerated as under:
i. Issue a Writ of Declaration or any Writ, Order or Direction of like nature declaring Section 2(1)(u), Section 50 and Explanation to Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 to be unconstitutional as being in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 19(6), 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution of India;
ii. Quash and set aside the impugned ECIR no. ECIR/07/HIU/2021 and stay all pro
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.