Vipul Shipping Engineering Works Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Kerala High Court)
Kerala High Court held that writ against provisional attachment order passed u/s. 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act [PMLA] is not maintainable since efficacious alternative statutory remedy available. Accordingly, writ dismissed.
Facts- These appeals have been preferred challenging the common judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge, whereby the said Writ Petitions were dismissed as non-maintainable on the ground that the petitioners had failed to exhaust the statutory remedies available under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. However, liberty was reserved to the appellants/petitioners to challenge the impugned orders before the appropriate statutory authorities, and such authorities were directed to consider the objections and claims raised by the petitioners, untrammelled by the observations made in the impugned judgment. Being aggrieved these appeals have been preferred.
Conclusion- In Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, the Apex Court has held that Section 5 of the Act provides a balancing arrangement to secure the interest of the person as well as to ensure that the proceeds of crime remain available for being dealt with in the manner provided by the Act. This provision has a reasonable nexus with the objectives sought to be achieved by the Act, namely, the effective prevention and regulation of money laundering.
