Syamraj Nadarajan vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 10908 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
   THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1944
                       WP(CRL.) NO. 998 OF 2022
   CRIME NO.04/2020 OF ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE KOCHI, Ernakulam
PETITIONERS:

    1     SYAMRAJ NADARAJAN
          S/O.P.V.NADARAJAN, PLACHERIYIL HOUSE,
          VAZHAPPALLY.P.O, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM,
          PIN - 686103

    2     MEENU JYOTHILEKSHMI @ MEENU .J
          W/O..SYAMRAJ NADARAJAN, PLACHERIYIL HOUSE,
          VAZHAPPALLY.P.O, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686103

          BY ADVS.
          R.ANIL
          M.SUNILKUMAR
          THOMAS ABRAHAM (NILACKAPPILLIL)
          THOMAS SABU VADAKEKUT
          MAHESH BHANU S.
          RESSIL LONAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1     UNION OF INDIA
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
          MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
          NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001

    2     DEPUTY DIRECTOR
          DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, ZONAL OFFICE,
          MULLASSERRY CANAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011

          BY ADV
          ADV SANGEETHARAJ - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(CRL.) NO. 998 OF 2022
                                   2

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioners are the husband and wife and are being

proceeded against in O.C. No.1422/2021 of PMLA which is a

complaint filed on the basis of a complaint submitted by the Deputy

Director of Directorate of Enforcement before the adjudication

authorities. As per the aforesaid proceedings vide a provisional

order of attachment bearing No.1/2021 dated 27.02.2021 the

properties of the petitioners were attached. Later, vide order dated

25.08.2021, the adjudicating authority confirmed the said order or

attachment. Now the petitioners submit that, the order of

attachment as confirmed as per the said order is valid only for a

period of 365 days and since the said period is over, they submitted

Ext.P1 representation before the 2nd respondent seeking the lifting of

attachment. The grievance of the petitioners is that the said

application is now pending consideration and they seek for a

direction to dispose of the said application.

2. In response to the averments contained in the writ

petition, the learned Standing Counsel pointed out that a complaint

is already submitted before the Special Court for PMLA on WP(CRL.) NO. 998 OF 2022

24.08.2022 and therefore the period of 365 days is not applicable.

3. However, I am of the view that since Ext.P1

representation submitted by the petitioners is pending consideration

before the 2nd respondent, it is only proper that a decision in this

regard be taken by him.

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1

representation as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a

period of one month from the date of production of copy of this

judgment.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

JUDGE scs WP(CRL.) NO. 998 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 998/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25-9-2022 TO LIFT THE ATTACHMENT