Point of Law : ‘Proceeds of crime’, property sought to be attached should have been derived or obtained directly or indirectly as a result of a criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence.

JUDGMENT :

Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

Heard Mr. D. Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Prasad Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

(i) to set aside the summons bearing F.No.ECIR/08/HZO/2011/5048 dated 11.11.2021 issued by respondent No.2;

(ii) to set aside the Provisional Attachment Order No.11/2021 bearing F.No.ECIR/HYZO/08/2011/5361 dated 25.11.2021 issued by respondent No.3.

3. Be it stated that by way of the impugned summons dated 11.11.2021 issued under sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, respondent No.2 called upon the petitioner to furnish complete details regarding his policies bearing Nos.MO22000752, MO22002114, 3018724Z and 3018697D held with RL360 Insurance Company Limited, UAE, including present status and valuation as well as details regarding source for the premium amounts paid for the above insurance policies.

4. By the Provisional Attachment Order No.11/2011 dated 25.11.2021 issued under the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, respondent No.3 ordered provisional attachment of the above insurance policies, further ordering that those shall not be transferred, disposed, removed, parted with or otherwise dealt with, until or unless specifically permitted to do so by respondent No.3.

5. F.I.R. bearing No.RC-35-2011-A-0018 dated 17.08.2011 was registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Sri B.P. Acharya, IAS, Chairman & Managing Director of Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation and others for offences punishable under Section 120-B read with Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

6. After completion of investigation, CBI filed charge sheet No.1 of 2012 dated 01.02.2012 before the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad under Section 120-B read with Sections 420, 409, 406, 109 and 477-A IPC read with Section 13(2) and Section 13(1)(c)(d), and 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

7. In the charge sheet submitted by the CBI petitioner was arrayed as accused No.13. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad (briefly, ‘CBI Court’ hereinafter) took cognizance of the charge sheet in C.C.No.6 of 2012.

8. Case of the CBI in C.C.No.6 of 2012 is that the accused persons named in the charge sheet had conspired with certain public officials to cheat the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation which had given 535 acres of land in Manikonda village for executing a project for residential and commercial development. In terms of the proposed development project, a joint venture by the name M/s. Emaar Hills Township Private Limited (briefly, ‘EMAAR’ hereinafter) was formed with equity structures to the extent of 74% being owned by Emaar Properties PJSC, Dubai and 26% being owned by Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation. The allegation is that instead of selling developed plots, undeveloped plots were sold and such sale reflected a lesser amount in the documents than the actual sale value, thus depriving Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation of its legitimate share. Insofar the petitioner is concerned the allegation was that he is the son of Mr. Koneru Rajendra Prasad who was an Additional Director in EMAAR. Petitioner had received USD 3,90,000 from two plot owners of the project i.e., an amount of USD 1,40,000 from one Challa Suresh for villa plot No.A-28 and USD 2,50,000 from one Parthasarathy for plot No.B-34 in EMAAR as part of excess amount paid towards purchase of villa plots. Further allegation was that the above amounts were not reflected in the books so as to deprive Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation of its legitimate share.

9. Petitioner filed a criminal petition before this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Pro