Abdul Majid vs Deputy Director Directorate Of Enforcement, Bangalore

FPA-PMLA-1501/BNG/2016

The above mentioned appeal is connected with Appeal nos.1500 and 1504 of 2016 in the same O.C. No. 574 of 2016.

By the common order, the properties of the appellant at Sl. No. 2 of standing in the name of the appellant was attached vide provisional attachment

order dated 30.03.2016. The said provisional attachment order was confirmed by the impugned order dated 22.09.2016 which has been challenged by

the Abdul Majid in the present appeal.

The main contention of the appellant is that the appellant has no connection or related to Syed Mobin and his wife, Aisha Naheed. His property

was wrongly attached under suspicion, therefore, both the orders should be quashed.

The appellant submits that his property was attached merely on the basis of that the appellant and Aisha Naheed were carrying on partnership

business under the name of M/s. Premier Plastic Industries by virtue of partnership deed dated 25.08.1989, till 31.03.1998. She has already retired

from the partnership business and deed of retirement was executed between the parties on 31.03.1998 and by virtue of said retirement deed, the

appellant became the absolute owner and proprietor of said M/s. Premier Plastic Industries. There was no justification whatsoever to attach his

property.

Even otherwise, the additional arguments are made on his behalf that the main accused Syed Mobin has already been discharged in the schedule

offence by the Judgement dated 1st April, 2017 where no appeal has been filed by the State and similarly he and his wife have also been discharged

by the Special Court (Lokayukta) and Principal Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in the PMLA complaint being Special Case no. 58/2016 by Judgement

dated 1.8.2018.

The counsel has argued that in view of above, not only the respondent has any case on merit but once the main

accused and his wife have been discharged from the schedule offence as well as PMLA complaint, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

I agree with the learned counsel for the appellant, there is no challenge on behalf of the respondent for passing of two Judgements acquitting the

main accused Syed Mobin and his wife in PMLA proceedings.

In view of the above circumstances, the impugned order dated 22.09.2016 is set-aside. Consequently, the provisional attachment order is also

quashed. The properties attached are released forthwith.