IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18507 of 2023 ==========================================================

JAINAM KUMARPAL SHAH Versus GURMEET SINGH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR JAL UNWALA, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR MASOOM K SHAH(6516)

for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3 for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI Date : 20/10/2023

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Jal Unwala, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Masoom K. Shah, the learned advocate appearing for the writ-applicants.

2. Mr. Jal Unwala, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ-applicants placed on record the draft amendment dated 20.10.2023. The same is taken on record and allowed.

To be carried out within one week.

3. By way of present writ-application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ-applicant herein is aggrieved by the following :-

(i) Provisional Attachment Order No. 06/2023 dated

07.08.2023 issued by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement u/s. 5(1) of the PMLA Act (Annexure-P/1);

(ii) Original Complaint No. 2054 of 2023 dated 04.09.2023 filed by Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority (Under the PMLA Act) (Annexure-P/

2);

(iii) Show Cause Notice dated 11.09.2023 issued by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority (Under the PMLA Act) u/s. 8(1) of the PMLA Act (Annexure-P/3).

4. It was submitted that, (a) the competent authority has failed to arrive at reason to believe independently, (b) it is on suspicion that the competent authority has arrived at reason to believe, Mr. Unwla, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that the aforesaid exercise is against the provisions of law. Mr. Soparkar, the learned Senior Counsel placed reliance on the decision in the case of The Income-tax Officer, I Ward, District VI, Calcutta and Ors., vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das, reported in (1976) 3 SCC 757 and submitted that the dispute in question is private dispute between the parties and at the instance of the complaint filed by the private complainant and aforesaid exercise has been initiated against the writ-applicants under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. It was submitted that the purpose of this Act is distinct and the same should not be used.

5. Considering the aforesaid, issue notice making it returnable on 9.11.2023.

In the meantime, show cause notice dated 11.09.2023 issued by the Adjudicating Authority (Under the PMLA Act) u/s. 8(1) of the PMLA Act is directed not to be acted upon till the next returnable date.

Direct service is permitted.

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J)

K.K. SAIYED