SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.
Directorate of Enforcement - Appellant
Versus
PC Financial Services Private Limited - Respondent
LPA 592 of 2022
Decided On : 31-10-2022




Writ petitions are not entertained when alternative statutory remedies are available under the relevant legislation, emphasizing adherence to legal protocols for addressing grievances.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Section 26 - Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - Section 37A(1) - Appeal against seizure orders - Appellant Directorate of Enforcement challenged orders leading to the release of seized amounts - The learned Single Judge had directed the release of funds of Rs.15,35,45,317/- and subsequent amount of Rs.25,00,00,000/- without fully considering the efficacy of available alternative remedies - The Tribunal has become functional, which led to the High Court's refusal to continue the writ petition - Jurisprudential principle emphasizes the non-entertainment of writ petitions when an equally efficacious alternative remedy exists as established in prior Supreme Court rulings including Titaghur Paper Mills and others. (Paras 13-24)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 - Not meant to bypass statutory mechanisms - Courts serve self-imposed restraint in entertaining petitions where efficacious remedies exist. (Paras 14-19)

Table of Content
1. investigation under pmla and seizure orders (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 8)
2. writ petition and appeal before tribunal (Para 6 , 7 , 9)
3. arguments on alternative remedies (Para 10 , 11 , 22)
4. precedents on alternative remedies (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 19)
5. court's decision to allow appeal (Para 21 , 23 , 24 , 25)

JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.

1. The present appeal is arising out of order dated 13.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C.) No.8514/2022 titled PC Financial Services Private Limited Vs. Directorate of Enforcement & Another.

2. The facts of the case reveal that the appellant Directorate of Enforcement is investigating a number of Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and Fintech Companies under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). In exercise of the powers conferred under the PMLA, the appellant seized an amount of Rs.106,93,84,385/- (Rupees One Hundred and Six Crores Ninety Three Lakhs Eighty Four Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Five only) vide seizure order dated 26.08.2021 [later corrected as Rs.87,84,26,805/- (Rupees Eighty Seven Crores Eighty Four Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand Eight Hundred and Five Only)] vide letter dated 12.10.2021 to Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-I), and an amount of approximately Rs.51,22,88,087/- (Rupees Fifty One Crores and Twenty Two Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand and Eighty Seven Only) under Section 37A(1) of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) vide Seizure Orders dated 26.08.2021, 30.09.2021 and 15.12.2001.

3. The respondent No.1 company preferred a Writ Petition No.36212/2021 before the High Court of Telangana praying for quashment of the impugned Seizure Orders and directing release of the properties which have been seized, and the learned Single Judge vide order dated 11.02.2022 passed in the said writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C.) No. 36212/2021 directed release of Rs.15,35,45,317/- (Rupees Fifteen Crores Thirty Five Lakhs forty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Seventeen Only).

4. An appeal was preferred before the Division Bench of the High Court of Telangana, i.e. Writ Appeal No.87/2022 titled Directorate of Enforcement Vs. PC Financial Services Private Limited & Others, and the Division Bench by an order dated 25.02.2022 has set aside the order dated 11.02.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge.

5. The respondent No.1 company preferred a Special Leave Petition, i.e. SLP (Civil) No.7551/2022 titled PC Financial Services Private Limited Vs. Union of India & Others, and the Hon'ble Supreme Court by an order dated 13.05.2022 passed in the said SLP directed release of the funds of Rs.15,35,45,317/- (Rupees Fifteen Crores Thirty Five Lakhs forty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Seventeen Only).

6. It is pertinent to note that subsequently respondent No.1 filed a writ petition before this Court (High Court of Delhi), i.e. W.P.(C.) No. 8514/2022 on 25.05.2022 and the learned Single Judge vide order dated 31.05.2022 has directed release of an additional amount of Rs.25,00,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Crores Only) to respondent No.1 company. An interim application was preferred by the Directorate of Enforcement before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 24.06.2022 challenging the grant of additional relief to the respondent No.1, however, the same was dismissed.

7. The appellant later on filed a complaint dated 21.06.2022 under Section 16(3) of the FEMA before the Adjudicating Authority against the respondent No.1 company and the other Noticees praying for penalisation of the Noticees and for confiscation of the seized properties of Rs.252,36,23,862/- (Rupees Two Hundred and Fifty Two Crores Thirty Six Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Two Only).

8. It is pertinent to note that the order dated 31.05.2022 granting release of additional amount of Rs.25,00,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Crores Only) was challenged before this Court in Letters Patent Appeal, i.e. LPA No.487/2022. This Court has

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top