Attachment of Bank accounts are not permitted after expiry of statutory time limit

Gobindo Das & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)

Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner to operate his bank accounts and postal accounts in question, which were attached by the Respondent as time limit of 180 days under section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were expired.

Facts: Petitioner has filed Writ Petition challenging the Provisional Attachment Order dated 11t^h December, 2020 passed by the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate wherein bank accounts of the Petitioner were attached under Section 5 (1) of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 on the ground that the validity of the Order has lost its force and ceased to have any validity under Section 5 (3) of the aforesaid Act after expiry of 180 days on 9^th June, 2021 and in view of the fact that the Respondent No. 2/adjudicating authority has not passed any formal order on or before 9^th June, 2021 under Section 8(3) of the aforesaid Act for confirmation or further extension of the aforesaid impugned Provisional Attachment Order dated 11t^h December, 2020. Therefore, the order has became functus officio.

It was submitted on behalf of the Respondents that the aforesaid impugned Provisional Attachment Order automatically should be deemed to have been extended by claiming benefit of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 23^rd March, 2020 in Suo moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 Re-cognizance For Extension Of Limitation which was extended from time to time and lastly on 27t^h April, 2021 where the Hon’ble Supreme Court in view of the steep rise in Covid-19 Virus cases engulfing the entire nation and the extraordinary situation caused by the outburst of Covid-19 Virus resulting difficulties by the litigants and advocates in filing petitions/applications/suits/appeals and all other proceeding irrespective of period of limitation prescribed in general or special law extended a period of limitation until further orders.

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner in support of his contention in the Writ Petition against the impugned action of the Respondent No. 3 has relied on a judgment Paragraphs – 16, 17, 18, 26, 29 & 30 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Kasi –vs- State, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 529.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.