The absence of a government notification under Section 56 of PMLA does not invalidate enforcement actions, and ECIR is not mandatory for executing a letter of request from a contracting state.

ORDER :

(S.M. Subramaniam, J.)

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in File No.T-2/ Misc./ 117/ DLZO-II/ 2019 on the files of respondent No.1 and quash the impugned order dated 29.04.2022.)

Under assail in the present Writ Petition is the order passed by the Directorate of Enforcement Government of India under Section 17(1A) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (herein after referred as PMLA).

I. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. Central Authority of India (MHA), Government of India, received a Letter of Request (LoR) dated 12.11.2018 from the Central Authority of Brazil (Office of the Prosecutor General of the State of Rio de Janeiro, through Federal Prosecutors) addressed to the Central Authority of India, seeking Legal Assistance in a criminal matter. The stated offences included that of breach of bank secrecy and the collection of financial information of accounts, which were used for money laundering in benefit of a transnational criminal organization, in addition to the freezing of corresponding assets and later repatriation, aiming at future confiscation of objects, products and instruments of crime related to corruption and money laundering, as well as the assurance of award of damages caused.

3. The said LoR was sent by the Central Authority of Brazil in pursuance of United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), adopted by the UN General Assembly on 31 October 2003, in force from 14 December 2005, where both India and Brazil are parties.

4. The said LoR disclosed that the case where Brazilian authorities were involved in large scale corruption (bribes) committed by SERGIO CABRAL, the then Governor of the State of Rio de Janeiro (2007-2014) and for large scale transfers of monies services of an Uruguay based financial operator anmely VINICIUS CLARET ("JUCA") and CLAUDIO BARBOZA ("TONY"), both of whom pleaded guilty; that more than 3,000 offshore companies were registered, whose accounts were existing in 53 countries, in transactions totalling to more than USD 1,632,000,000.00 (one billion, six hundred and thirty-two million dollars) and out of that US $13,249,403.49 was transferred to India through the accounts of 47 Indian entities, details of which were provided by the Brazilian Authority and Brazilian Authorities have requested for details of the Indian entities to which the amounts have been transferred and further requested to freeze the said bank accounts.

5. The accounts of M/s. Royal Impex was also frozen according to the details provided by the LoR and the investigation that followed. The Petitioner herein is the sole proprietor of M/s. Royal Impex.

6. On perusal of documents submitted by the Petitioner, it was revealed that as per the invoices, "Glamour Commorio De Cabelos LTDA", Emporio Commorio De Cabelos LTDA" & "Angel Commorio De Cabelos LTDA" were the consignees and the goods were shipped to Brazil. However, perusal of Foreign Inward Remittance Transaction advices/ certificates issued by Indian Bank, it was revealed that the huge amount of funds was remitted by third parties. As such, "Jack Brown", "Revelta Srl" Paraguay, "Nedja Commorcial Brokers Dwc LLC", "Argenta Holdings Venture Limited" "Toledot Ino" had remitted funds into the bank account of M/s Royal Impex maintained with Indian Bank, out of these funds, USD 3,35,774 was received against the corruption money generated at Brazil. It is evident from the above facts that USD 3,35,774 was not generated from genuine transactions and that it was adju