UJJAL BHUYAN, N. TUKARAMJI
Pradeep Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad Zonal Office – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of actions taken by authorities. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments presented by petitioners regarding constitutional violations. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. court observations on the investigations and actions by enforcement authorities. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. interpretation of pmla provisions concerning reason to believe and jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 13 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. legal determination regarding scheduled offences and grounds for actions under pmla. (Para 23) |
| 6. conclusion on lack of jurisdiction leading to quashing of the order. (Para 39 , 40 , 42 , 44) |
ORDER :
(Ujjal Bhuyan, J.)
Heard Mr. T.Niranjan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing E.Venkata Siddhartha, learned counsel for the petitioners; and Mr. V.Ram Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Enforcement Directorate representing the respondents.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:
Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat : (2018) 2 SCC 372
Ramesh Chandra Mehta v. State of West Bengal : AIR 1970 SC 940
S. Narayanappa v. Commissioner of Income Tax : AIR 1967 SC 523
Sheo Nath Singh v. Appellate Assistant Commissioner : (1972) 3 SCC 234
Income Tax Officer v. Lakhmani Mewal Das : (1976) 3 SCC 757 : AIR 1976 SC 1753 : (1976) 103 ITR 437
Tata Chemicals Limited v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)
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.