Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL
RANA AYYUB – Appellant
Versus
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging a summoning order (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 2. the trial of the scheduled (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
1. Challenging a summoning order issued by the Court of the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, CBI Court No.1, Ghaziabad, on a complaint lodged by the respondent under Section 45 read with Section 44 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 ,For short, “PMLA” or the “Act”, as the case may be, the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
2. We have heard Ms. Vrinda Grover, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of SignatureI Nont Vedrifieida for the respondent.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that during the pandemic, she initiated crowdfunding campaign through an online crowdfunding platform named “Ketto” and ran three campaigns from April 2020 to September 2021. In connection with the same, the Mumbai Zonal Office of the Enforcement Directorate initiated an enquiry again
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
