Court mandates Adjudicating Authority to ensure compliance with procedural norms under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has directed the Adjudicating Authority to determine whether all the requested Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) have been provided to the petitioner, Dipak De, in a case involving allegations of money laundering. The judgment mandates the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to supply any outstanding documents if they form part of the relied-upon evidence, allowing the petitioner to file a supplementary reply.
The case arose when Dipak De petitioned the court, alleging non-receipt of complete RUDs necessary for responding to a show cause notice issued under Section 8(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The petitioner argued that the documents provided electronically were incomplete, hindering his ability to effectively respond to the allegations.
Justice Krishna Rao, presiding over the matter, highlighted the procedural requirements under the Adjudicating Authority (Procedure) Regulations, 2013. The court noted that while electronic service of documents is valid under these regulations, the completeness of the documents remains a critical issue. The court emphasized that the Adjudicating Authority must first ascertain whether the requested documents are indeed RUDs and ensure their supply if they have not been provided.
The judgment underscores the importance of procedural fairness, allowing the petitioner to file a supplementary reply if additional documents are supplied. Furthermore, the court provided that either party could seek redress under Section 26 of the PMLA if aggrieved by the Adjudicating Authority's decision regarding the documents.
The ruling came in response to the ED's allegations of money laundering involving substantial cash seized from the petitioner. The court's directive aims to uphold the procedural integrity of the adjudication process, ensuring that the petitioner is afforded a fair opportunity to contest the charges.
Bottom Line:
Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 - Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) - Adjudicating Authority to first decide whether the requested documents are relied upon documents and direct Enforcement Directorate (ED) to supply them if they are not served - Opportunity to file supplementary reply granted if further documents are supplied.
Statutory provision(s):
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Sections 8(1), 8(2), 26; Adjudicating Authority (Procedure) Regulations, 2013 Rule 13(2); Information Technology Act, 2000 Section 13.
Dipak De v. Union of India, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc id # 2866828
