JUDGMENT :

NELSON SAILO, J.

1. This order will dispose of both the writ petitions, since common issues are involved. In W.P. (Crl.) No. 2/2022, we are concerned with the freezing of 4 Bank Accounts of the petitioner while in W.P. (Crl.) No. 3/2022, we are concerned with the freezing of 1 Bank Account of the petitioner.

2. Heard Mr. Varun Garg, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Mr. H. Zodinsanga, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 HDFC Bank in W.P. (Crl.) No. 2/2022 and Mr. Suraj Deka, learned counsel for respondent ICICI Bank in both the writ petitions.

3. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondent No. 1 in freezing and the continued freezing of their Bank Accounts in HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank, which according to them is in violation of the due process of law and the process mandated by the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (Act of 2002).

4. The brief facts of the case is that on the basis of FIR No. 216/2021 dated 14.12.2021, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on 16.12.2021 registered ECIR/HYZ0/36/2021 against one M/s Nayla Family Exports Private Limited and Others and initiated an investigation in relation to the illegal smuggling of human hair. Pursuant thereto, the ED conducted search on officers and residence of various persons in Hyderabad and Mizoram including the petitioners herein. During the search of the petitioner’s residence, certain papers and records of the petitioner and her husband including original property papers, mobile phones, laptop along with Indian Currency of Rs. 26 Lakhs were seized. The ED also proceeded to issue Orders dated 09.02.2022 and 10.02.2022 under Section 17(1) of the Act of 2002 for freezing the Bank Accounts of various persons including that of the petitioners, which are maintained in various Banks as mentioned herein above.

5. Subsequently, on 07.03.2022, the ED proceeded to file Original Application (O.A.) bearing No. 644/2022 under Section 17(4) of the Act of 2002 before the Adjudicating Authority constituted under the Act of 2002, requesting for retention of the property seized and continuation of the freezing of Bank Accounts. As per the O.A. it was stated that the ED had frozen a total number of 143 Bank Accounts and the details of which were mentioned in the O.A.

6. In the said O.A, the petitioner in W.P. (Crl.) 2/2022 was arrayed as defendant No. 3. While a few of her Bank Accounts were mentioned in the said list of 143 Bank Accounts including 1 Bank Account in HDFC Bank but however, 4 Bank Accounts of the petitioner, 2 Bank Accounts each in HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank were not included in the list of 143 Bank Accounts in the O.A. The details of the Bank Accounts are as follows:

7. Similarly, in respect of the petitioner in W.P. (Crl.) No. 3/2022, he was arrayed as defendant No. 2 in the O.A. While his 2 (two) Bank Accounts in Mizoram Rural Bank was mentioned in the said list of 143 Bank Accounts but however, his Bank Account in ICICI Bank is not included in the 143 Bank Accounts in the O.A. The details of the said Bank Account is as below:

8. According to the petitioners, no Freezing Order in connection with the above 4+1 Bank Accounts were annexed with the O.A. Accordingly, there was no mention of the said 4+1 Bank Accounts being frozen by ED and importantly, no prayer was made by the ED seeking continuation of their freezing. However, the said 4 Bank Accounts have been frozen by the ED and continued to be frozen ti