ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These intra court appeals impugn the identical orders, both dated 17th January, 2014, of the learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal of W.P.(C) Nos.318/2014 & 345/2014 respectively preferred by the appellants.

(2.) We have heard the senior counsel for the appellant appearing in LPA No.99/2014. No separate arguments have been addressed in the other appeal.

(3.) The respondent Directorate of Enforcement vide order dated 30th August, 2013 under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and addressed inter alia to both the appellants, provisionally attached property No.11, Prithviraj Road, New Delhi held in the name of the appellant M/s. Ajanta Merchant Pvt. Ltd. A complaint dated 24th September, 2013 under Section 5(5) of the said Act was also filed against the appellants before the Adjudicating Authority under the said Act. The Adjudicating Authority issued notices dated 30th September, 2013 of the said complaints, under Section 8 of the Act, to both the appellants calling upon the appellants to show cause why the property provisionally attached should not be declared to be the property involved in money laundering and confiscated by the Central Government and directed the appellants to appear before the Adjudicating Authority on 11th November, 2013. The appellants filed their reply before the Adjudicating Authority and also claim to have filed applications dated 9th & 10th January, 2014 respectively under Section 11 of the Act read with Regulation 18 of the Adjudicating Authority Regulations, 2006, seeking permission for cross-examination of witnesses on whose statements, according to the appellants, the complaints against them were based.