Bombay High Court
M/S Armstrong Infrastructure ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 21 July, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
3-WP-938-2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 938 OF 2022
M/s. Armstrong Infrastructure
Private Limited Through
Sameer Magan Bhujbal And Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 939 OF 2022
Parvesh Construction Private Limited
Through Director Satyan Appa
Kesarkar And Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1341 OF 2022
M/s. Devisha Infrastructure
Private Limited Through Sameer Magan
Bhujbal And Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1342 OF 2022
Parvesh Construction Private Limited
Through Director Satyan Appa
Kesarkar And Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents
....
Mr. Naresh Jain a/w Ms. Neha Anchlia, Mr. Sham Walve and Mr.
Sudarshan Khawase, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. Anil. C. Singh, ASG a/w Mr. Suresh Kumar, Mr. Aditya Thakkar, Mr.
D. P. Singh, Ms. Smita Thakur, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
Mr. Irfan Sait, APP for the Respondent - State.
Digitally signed
....
by SAJAKALI
SAJAKALI LIYAKAT
JAMADAR
LIYAKAT Date:
JAMADAR 2022.07.22
1 of 4
19:23:15
+0530 Sajakali Jamadar
3-WP-938-2022.doc
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 21st JULY, 2022.
PER COURT:
1. The parties were heard for considering the grant of interim
relief. The petitioners in all these petitions are aggrieved by the
order taking cognizance of the impugned complaints under Section
3(2) r/w Section 62 of the Prohibition of Benami Property
Transactions Act, 1988. (for short 'the said Act')
2. The complaint is filed under Section 3(2) r/w Section 62 of
the aforesaid Act. The brief allegations are that the accused No.1 -
M/s. Armstrong Infrastructure Private Limited had purchased the
property. The accused had acquired Benami properties by investing
ill-gotten money through shell companies. The properties were
acquired through auction from D.R.T. on the basis funds
channelized to M/s. Armstrong Infrastructure Private Limited.
Initially show cause notice was issued under Section 24(1) of the
said Act, which was resulted into attachment of the properties and
thereafter, the complaint was filed.
3. The trial Court has taken cognizance of the complaint and
issued summons to the accused. The petitions involve several
issues. The main issue urged by the learned counsel for petitioners
is that the alleged transactions had occurred during the period from
Sajakali Jamadar 2 of 4
3-WP-938-2022.doc
2008 to 2011. The aforesaid Act was amended in 2016 and thus
the provisions of amended Act cannot be applied retrospectively for
the transactions which were performed prior to the amended act
coming into force.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners has relied upon the
several decisions, such as Nexus Feeds Limited and Others V/s. The
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2022(5)] TMI 262
delivered by Telangana High Court, Interim order passed in the
case of Mahanti Traders Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Union of India and Others
passed by this Court in Writ Petition (L) No.7640 of 2020, Joseph
Isharat V/s. Rozy Nishikant Gaikwad 2017 (5) ABR 706 decided by
this Court, Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Union of India and Ors.
decided by Calcutta High Court, AIR 2020 Cal 182, and submitted
that the Courts have taken a view that the effect of the Amended
Act will have to prospective and not retrospective.
5. Learned ASG appearing for respondent submitted that the
petitioners are required to show that the offence under the old Act
is not an offence under Amended Act. The decision in the case of
Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has been challenged before the
Apex Court. Operation of order passed in the said decision under
challenge has been stayed. The petition is reserved for judgment.
Sajakali Jamadar 3 of 4
3-WP-938-2022.doc
6. Learned counsel for Petitioner submitted that the order
passed by the Apex Court in the case of Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.
(supra) has been taken into consideration by Telangana High Court
in the case of Nexus Feeds Limited and Others V/s. The Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax (supra).
7. The petitions are required to be heard in detail. The decision
of apex Court in the case of Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is
pending. These petitions be listed for further consideration on 26 th
August, 2022.
8. In the meantime, there shall be ad-interim relief of stay of
the proceedings till the next date of hearing.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Sajakali Jamadar 4 of 4
