Money laundering case: Anil Deshmukh’s wife’s plea against attachment of assets non-maintainable, ED tells HC

The ED on July 16 last year provisionally attached immovable assets worth Rs 4.2 crore belonging to Deshmukh and his family members under PMLA in corruption cases.

The Bombay High Court on December 10 last year said the ED’s adjudicating authority can hear and pass final orders on the provisional attachment of assets of Anil Deshmukh and his wife Aarti in a money laundering case, but no coercive action shall be taken with regard to these properties till January 10.

A division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav J Jamdar had then directed the ED to submit its affidavit in reply to Deshmukh’s plea. The HC directed the adjudicating authority, which confirms the provisional attachments under PMLA, to continue hearing on whether the properties belonging to Deshmukh and his family members are from proceedings of alleged money laundering, but not to pass the final verdict till further orders of the HC.

Deshmukh’s wife Aarti Deshmukh and Premier Port Links Private Limited have challenged the proceedings before the adjudicating authority under PMLA. Deshmukh also sought direction to the ED to constitute an adjudicating authority strictly as per PMLA and sought the current authority, with a single member instead of three, be restrained from conducting further proceedings.

In the affidavit filed through Assistant Director Tassine Sultan, the ED raised preliminary objection about the maintainability stating the provisional attachment order of July 16, 2021, and the original complaint has been filed as per the law. Assuming attachment is confirmed, a statutory appellate remedy before Appellate Tribunal, PMLA is also provided in the law, according to the ED affidavit.

“Hence, there is no basis whatsoever for the petitioner to be permitted to circumvent two statutory forums and directly approach HC in its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Therefore, at this stage the writ petition ought not to be entertained and the statutory mechanism be permitted to continue,” it read.

Referring to past Supreme Court judgment, the affidavit added, “Mechanism is provided in the Act for redressal of grievances at different stages before the Adjudicating authority at first instance and then before the Appellate Tribunal. It is only when the person is aggrieved with decision of Appellate Tribunal, may file an appeal in HC, therefore petitioner is not justified in rushing to court at this stage and plea be dismissed as non-maintainable.”

While replying, Deshmukh sought time to file a rejoinder to the ED’s affidavit.

The HC took the affidavit on record and said the earlier interim order will continue and posted the further hearing to January 19.