SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(ATFP) 309

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI FPA-PMLA-2424/CHD/2018 Shamsher Singh … Appellant Versus The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chandigarh … Respondent Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared For the Appellant : Anjna Masih, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Mrinal Kumar, Advocate CORAM SHRI V. ANANDARAJAN : MEMBER SHRI RAJESH MALHOTRA : MEMBER

FINAL ORDER

12.06.2024

Dictated by: SHRI RAESH MALHOTRA

Present appeal is filed against the impugned order dated 11.06.2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority vide which it confirmed PAO No. 02/2017 dated 29.12.2017 for attachment of properties in Original Complaint No. 884/2018.

2. As per the facts of the case, M/s.Unipay2U Marketing Private Ltd. through its office bearers, representatives and agents duped several hundreds of investors of several crores of rupees, by floating a ponzi scheme and promising high returns. During the year 2011, many writ petitions, including CWPs No. 11094/2011 & CWP-14795-2011, No. 22530/2011 & 20726/2011 were filed by more than five hundred aggrieved victims/investors before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, against several persons including Shri Arvind Kumar Singh, seeking issuance of directions to the respondent government authorities to take action with regard to multi-crore cyber fraud against the companies/persons who defrauded thousands of people. From time to time several directions were passed in these writ petitions, including directions in CWP-14795 of 2011. During pendency of the said writ petitions Directorate of Enforcement took up the investigation by way of recording a case No. ECIR/01/CHD/2012 dated 07.03.2012, since the below mentioned FIRs registered in the matter disclosed offences under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 471 Indian Penal Code, 1860 which are scheduled offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

The offences of cheating criminal conspiracy/fraud etc, were committed at various places in India and the investigation in respect of the same are continuing and under progress. Apart from the above FIRs, several FIRs were also registered in similar matters where investors had been duped. In connection with the above matter police had registered two FIRs, as under:

a) FIR No. 652 dated 16.05.2011, u/s 420, 406, 467, 468, 471& 506of IPC, by Police Station Panipat City, Distt. Panipat, Haryana, against Shri Sachin Mittal, Ashish Mittal S/o Shri Suresh Mittal, R/o H. No. 1749, Housing Board Colony, Panipat and one Dimple of Panipat, upon allegation of cheating/forgery in connection with the afore-stated ponzi Scheme. The allegation in the FIR in this case was that in the ponzi Scheme floated by Unipay2U Marketing Private Ltd. sister concern Visarev, the complainant was allured to invest monies and the unsuspecting complainant was made to invest Rs.14,50,000/-.

b) FIR No. 234 dated 16.06.2011 u/s 420, 465, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC by Police Station, Panipat Sadar, Distt. Panipat, Haryana, against Bodh Raj Gandhi, Arun Gandhi S/o Shri Bodh Raj Gandhi, Smt. Raj Rani W/o Bodh Raj Gandhi,(All Resident of Panipat) and James, CEO cum Director of M/s Unipay2U Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, upon allegation of cheating/forgery in connection with the afore-stated ponzi scheme. The allegation in the FIR in this case was that the in theponzi scheme floated by Unipay 2U Marketing Private Ltd. and its sister concern Visarev, the complainant was allured to invest monies and the unsuspecting complainant and his relatives were made to invest Rs.22,62,000/- and Rs.5,70,220/- was paid back in order to solicit more investment.

The aforesaid FIRs disclosed offences under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 471 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), which are the scheduled offences under PMLA, 2002 and are covered under Part A, Paragraph I of the Scheduled of Offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

On the basis of the said FIRs respondent-ED registered ECIR/01/CHD/2012 and thereafter, conducted investigation under PMLA. During Investigation by respondent-ED it transpired that several other FIRs were also registered in different parts of the country in connection with similar offences having been committed against the various victim investors. It was also learnt that an FIR No. 202 dated 12.07.2012 under Section 406/420/120B of IPC and 66-A IT Act, was registered at the P

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top