Shiv Murat Dwivedi Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court upheld the attachment order under PMLA in view of appellant’s criminal and appellant’s failure to discharge the burden of proving the facts in support of his claim that the attached properties are untainted and not obtained directly or indirectly from criminal activity.
Facts- The instant Appeal under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 has been preferred by the Appellant against the final order and judgment dated 25.02.2025 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal. By way of the Impugned Order, the learned Appellate Tribunal, while dismissing the appeal u/s. 26 of PMLA, has upheld the Attachment Order dated 06.08.2015 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in the Original Complainant No. 478/2015, which confirmed the attachment of properties attached by the Respondent/Enforcement Directorate dated 28.03.2025.
Conclusion- The Appellant’s involvement in the offences under the ITP Act and MCOCA forms the basis of bringing his crime syndicate under the ambit of money laundering and is sufficient to categorize the subject properties as proceeds of crime. The Appellant, therefore, has indeed failed to discharge the burden of proving the facts in support of his claim that the attached properties are untainted and not obtained directly or indirectly from criminal activity.
