2022/DHC/005701

$~104

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Decision: 19th December, 2022

+

W.P.(C) 15863/2022 & CM APPLs. 49341/2022, 49967/2022

MR. P. S. GAHLAUT

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Percival Billimoria, Sr. Adv. with

Mr. Archit Singh, Mr. Sudhir Chahal

& Ms. Rachita Sood, Advs.

versus

ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY, PMLA

THROUGH REGISTRAR

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Zoheb Hossain & Mr. Vivek

Gurmani, Advs.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking directions

to the Respondent – Adjudicating Authority, PMLA, to supply the legible

copies of all the Relied-Upon Documents (“RUDs”) annexed along with the

Original Complaint bearing No.1802/2022. The Petitioner further seeks

directions to the Respondent to extend the time period for filing the reply to

the Show Cause Notice dated 22^nd September, 2022, in accordance with the

mandate of the PMLA.

3. The background of the case is that a provisional attachment order

dated 4th August, 2022 was passed by the Directorate of Enforcement

(“ED”) against the Petitioner, whereby movable/immovable properties,

belonging to the Petitioner, his HUF and his son, valued at

Digitally Signed

By:DEVANSHU JOSHI

Signing Date:21.12.2022

15:30:35

Signature Not Verified

2022/DHC/005701

Rs.14,50,74,558/-, were attached by the ED. Subsequently, on 31^st August,

2022, the ED filed the Original Complaint in the matter concerning the

impugned provisional attachment order, before the Respondent –

Adjudicating Authority. On 22nd September, 2022, a show cause notice was

issued against the Petitioner by the Adjudicating Authority. The said show

cause notice was stated to have been deliberated on 30th September, 2022,

and the Petitioner was directed to file its reply to the Original Complaint by

or before 4^th November, 2022. It is the submission of the Petitioner that the

said show cause notice was neither accompanied by the Original Complaint

nor any of the RUDs.

4. Thereafter, the Petitioner sought the Original Complaint and the

RUDs, and the same were served upon the Petitioner by ED, on 13th

October, 2022. However, while scrutinizing the RUDs, it was revealed to the

Petitioner that several key documents in the said RUDs were illegible or

cropped out. An application was accordingly preferred by the Petitioner

seeking legible copies of the said RUDs, and further time was sought for

filing of the reply to the Original Complaint.

5. Vide email dated 27^th October, 2022, the petitioner was informed that

the Respondent has considered the request of the Petitioner and had granted

10 additional days to file the reply. However, it is submitted that the issue

concerning the supply of illegible copies of the RUDs was not considered by

the Respondent. Yet again, the Petitioner requested the Respondent to

supply the legible copies of the RUDs, vide email dated 27^th October, 2022.

In response, the Respondent extended the time for filing of the reply till 22^nd

November, 2022, however, failed to consider the issue relating to supply of

Digitally Signed

By:DEVANSHU JOSHI

Signing Date:21.12.2022

15:30:35

Signature Not Verified

2022/DHC/005701

legible copies of the RUDs. The response dated 11^th November, 2022 of the

Respondent – Adjudicating Authority, reads as under:

6. Mr. Billimoria, ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner

submits that, the grievance of the Petitioner is that he is unable to file a reply

to the Original Complaint without legible copies of the RUDs. He submits

that a large number of the documents are complete illegible, thus, resulting

in difficulty in filing the reply. Reliance is placed in the petition upon the

judgment of this Court in JK Tyre and Industries Ltd. Vs Directorate of

Enforcement [W.P.(C) 5713/2020 decided on 27^th October, 2021].

7. Mr. Zoheb Ho