The Supreme Court allowed the Special Court to proceed with the restitution application despite the pending appeal under the PMLA.
On 06-03-2025, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan reviewed an appeal along with the SLP and IA and held that the pending appeal and adjournment would not prevent the Learned Special Court from proceeding with the application for restitution of attached properties under Section 8(7) read with Section 8(8) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Court also granted time for the resolution of the larger issue and listed the matter for further hearing.
The Supreme Court, while considering the matters in A. Nos. 9692-9693/2024 and SLP(C) No. 20174/2021, acknowledged the submissions made by the Learned Solicitor General of India. It was stated that the larger issue involved in the case was being addressed, and accordingly, a request for four weeks' time was sought. The Court acceded to the request and directed that the matters be listed on 17th April 2025, among the first five cases.
In relation to SLP(C) No. 20174/2021, a note submitted by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, indicated that on 27th February 2025, the liquidator had filed an application before the Learned Special Court under Section 8(7) read with Section 8(8) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The application sought restitution of the attached properties, and it was already scheduled for a hearing on 11th March 2025.
The Supreme Court clarified that despite granting the adjournment and the pending status of the appeal before it, the Learned Special Court was free to proceed with the adjudication of the application in accordance with the law. The matter was accordingly directed to be listed on 17th April 2025.
Mr. Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G., Mr. Zoheb Hussain, A.S.G., Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv., Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Adv., Mr. Mrigank Pathak, Adv., Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Adv., Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR, Ms. Aakriti Mishra, Adv., Mr. Aditi Singh, Adv., Ms. Nidhi Saini, Adv., Ms. Shweta Desai, Adv., Mr. Anand Kirti, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Vij, Adv., Mr. Niraj Chamyal, Adv., Mr. Dhananjay Sud, Adv., Mr. Harsh Gupta, Adv., Mr. Aishwarya Prasad, Adv., Mr. Shashank Shekhar, AOR and Mr. Asa Harivenkat, Advocate, represented the Appellant.
Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ravi Raghunath, AOR, Mr. Aniruth Purusothaman, Adv., Mr. Nakul Patwardhan, Adv., Ms. Kaarunya Lakshmi, Adv., Ms. Sejal Jain, Adv., Mr. Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare, A.S.G., Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv., Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv., Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Adv., Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv., Ms. Aastha Singh, Adv., Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR, Ms. Aditi Singh, Adv., Mr. Anand Kirti, Adv., Ms. Nidhi Saini, Adv., Ms. Shweta Desai, Adv., Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, Mr. Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G., Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv., Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv., Ms. Kanu Agrawal, Adv., Mr. Saurav Roy, Adv., Ms. Rajeshwari Shankar, Adv., Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR, Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anupam Singh, AOR, Mr. Siddharth Joshi, Adv., Mr. Shubham Madaan, Adv. and Mr. Naman Gowda Raghav, Advocate, appeared for the Respondens.
Subscribers can access the Case, including Case Analysis, Ratio Decidendi, Headnotes, Briefs, Case Research, Cited Case Laws, Case Law Cross-references, and the latest updates on Statutes, Notifications, Circulars, Guidelines, Press Releases and more.
Click on the following Citation/Link to access these resources:
Comments