SUNITA GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed the present petitions impugning the provisional attachment orders passed in their respective cases by the Initiating Officer (hereafter 'IO'). The said orders have been passed under Section 24 (3) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (hereafter 'the Act').

(2.) The principal issue raised in these petitions is common and, therefore, the petitions have been heard together. The petitioners assail the jurisdiction of the IO to pass orders of provisional attachment on the ground that similar orders had been passed earlier which were set aside by the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority had after considering the responses of the petitioners held the properties (amounts) sought to be attached were not benami properties. The petitioners claim that in the aforesaid circumstances, it was not open for the IO to issue a fresh show cause notice and pass a provisional order attaching the properties in question (the amounts lying in the respective bank accounts of the petitioners).

(3.) In order to provide a factual context to the controversy, the facts as obtaining in W.P. (C) 8522/2018 are narrated below:-