AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sl.
No.",Property Description,Value as per Document,Property holder Name
1.,"Survey No. 297/1B2, 297/1B1 (1 acre and
25.50 cent plot) yan Kottayur Village,
Natham Sub- Division, Dindigul District,
Tamilnadu. ( Doc No. 575/2007)","Rs. 92,000/-","Smt. S. Sugumari W/o
Shri A. Seeni @
Seenivasan
2.,"Survey No. 297/1B2, 297/1B1, 197/1A2 (1
ace and 8.50 cent plot), Ayan Kottayur
Village, Natham Sub-Division, Dindigul
District, Tamilnadu. (Doc No. 1011/2013)","Rs. 1,30,000/-","Smt. S. Sugumari W/o
Shri A. Seeni @
Seenivasan
3.,"Survey No. 375B, New Survey No. 375/13
having Door No. 1/145/1, Ayan Velampatti
Village, Natham Sub-Division, Dindigul
District, Tamilnadu. (Doc No. 1011/2013)","Rs. 2,00,000/-","Smt. S. Vasuki W/o Shri
A. Seeni @ Seenivasan
4.,"1000 sq. ft. plot with a house situated at
Ayan Velampatti Village (Doc No.
1681/2010)","Rs. 1,29,000/-","A land measuring 1000
sq. ft. with a house
measuring 550 sq. ft.
owned by his mother
â€"in â€" law late Smt.
Sulochana was given to
his second wife Smt.
Vasuki, as a gift through
partition deed.
It is stated in the application that the FIR No. 725/2010 dated 27.12.2010 was taken up as Calendar Case No. 75 of 2011 before the Additional,,,
Special Court for NDPS and the Appellant Seeni @ seevasan was acquitted by order dated 19.03.2015 which is annexed at ANNEXURE A15 in the,,,
appeal.,,,
It is further submitted that the FIR NO. 140/2013 dated 18.06.2013 was taken up as Calendar Case No. 52 of 2016 before the Additional District,,,
Judge and all the Appellants were acquitted by order dated 1.07.2017. The FIR No. 82/2015 dated 19.02.2015 was taken up as Calendar Case No.,,,
160 of 2015 before the Additional District Judge and all the Appellants were acquitted by order dated 29.09.2016.,,,
The copies of the order of acquittal dated 19th March, 2015, 1st July, 2017 and 29th September, 2016 are placed on record by the appellant. It is a",,,
matter of fact that the Appellants were acquitted by the Ld. Trial Court in all the three cases. It is submitted when the acquittal in C.C. No. 75 of,,,
2011 by order dated 19.03.2015 was appraised before the Adjudicating Authority, the Ld. Authority has given its finding in Para 5 internal page 30 that",,,
the present PAO was based on the FIR No. 140/2013 and the same has not resulted in acquittal.,,,
It is submitted that all the Appellants are now acquitted in all the cases including FIR No. 140/2013, hence on this ground itself this Tribunal may",,,
allow the present appeals and release all the property of the appellants and drop all the proceedings under PMLA Act. Learned counsel for the,,,
appellant is that despite the same, the attachment order was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. It might be possible that since the PMLA",,,
complaint was pending therefore the Adjudicating Authority has exercised his discretion not to drop the proceedings but to continue with the,,,
attachment.,,,
When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel for the appellants has produced the copy of the order dated 20th December, 2017 passed in",,,
CC No. 05/2016 whereby the accused were acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. from the charges punishable u/s 3 r/w 4 of the Prevention of,,,
Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the properties which are attached by the authority of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 under Ex. P.40,",,,
Ex. P.41 is ordered to be released and directed to hand over the same with respective accused.,,,
The accused were also acquitted from the charges punishable under Section 3 read with Section 4 of PMLA 2002 wherein it was further ordered,,,
that the properties of the accused which were attached by the said authority are acquitted u/s 235(1) Cr.P.C. from the charges punishable u/s 3 r/w 4,,,
of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the properties which are attached by the authority of Prevention of Money Laundering Act,",,,
2002 under Ex. P.40, Ex. P.41 is ordered to be released and directed to hand over the same with respective accused.",,,
The learned counsel for the respondent has not disputed the said facts. Under these circumstances, it appears from the acquittal order that all the",,,
appellants are acquitted pertaining to the FIR as well as charges punishable Section 3 or 4 of PMLA.,,,
In view of above all the appeals are allowed. The properties which are attached by the authority are released forthwith.,,,
As far as the direction for handing over the attached properties are concerned same to the said order has already been passed by the District,,,
Judge for CBI cases second Additional District Court Madurai by the judgment of 20th September, 2017.",,,
All appeals and pending applications are disposed of.,,,
No Costs.,,,