Archana Gupta Vs Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement (Appellate Tribunal Under SAFEMA Delhi)
PMLA Tribunal: Property Can Be Attached Even If Owner Not Accused In Scheduled Offence – Attachment Of Wife’s Property Upheld
The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal filed by Smt. Archana Gupta challenging the provisional attachment of her Gurgaon property and bank account under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The case arose from a fraud involving forged SEBI circulars and bogus investment schemes run by Shiv Raj Puri, through which investors were allegedly cheated of large sums exceeding ₹405 crore. Investigations revealed that commissions arising from these fraudulent investments were routed through partnership firms including M/s BG Financial Services, where the appellant and her husband Sanjay Gupta were partners.
The Enforcement Directorate attached two properties of the appellant:
- A residential plot at Palam Vihar, Gurgaon, and
- A bank account with Axis Bank containing about ₹29 lakh.
The appellant contended that she was merely a housewife with no role in the fraud, and that the attachment was based on conjectures without proper evidence.
Rejecting these arguments, the Tribunal held:
- Under the PMLA, property derived from proceeds of crime can be attached irrespective of whether the owner is an accused in the scheduled offence.
- Even mere possession of proceeds of crime can attract action under Section 3 of PMLA.
- The appellant herself admitted that all financial affairs were handled by her husband, who was involved in the fraudulent investment scheme.
- Evidence showed that commission received through the bogus scheme was used to repay bank loans and purchase the property in the appellant’s name.
- The appellant failed to produce satisfactory evidence explaining the legitimate source of funds used to acquire the attached assets.
The Tribunal also noted that Sanjay Gupta (husband of the appellant) had already been convicted under IPC for cheating and conspiracy, and prosecution under PMLA was pending.
Result: The Tribunal held that the attachment was justified on the preponderance of probabilities and dismissed the appeal, directing that the properties remain attached until the PMLA trial is concluded.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI
The present appeal is directed against the order dated 20.03.2012 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (AA) set up under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), in Original Complaint (OC) No. 163/12 whereby the ld. AA has confirmed the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) No. 1/2012 dated 22.10.2012, attaching the properties of the appellant herein. In the present appeal the attachment of the following two properties of the appellant has been challenged:
| S. No. | Details/particulars | Owned/ held in the name of | Recorded Value/ balance available (in case of bank account) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Plot of land at No. C-2/1056, Palam Vihar Gurgaon |
Smt. Archana Gupta W/o Shri Sanjay Gupta | Rs. 45.00 Lakh + Rs2.65 Lakh towards Registration and Stamp Duty |
| 2. | Account No. 910010013974898 with Axis Bank New Delhi, | Smt. Archana Gupta W/o Shri Sanjay Gupta | Rs. 29,07,917.83/- |
2. The relevant facts, briefly, are that on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Shri Binu Soman, Assistant Vice-President, CITI Bank, DLF, Phase-II, Gurgaon, before the Haryana Police, an FIR (FIR No. 341/2010) was registered by the State Police against one Sh. Shiv Raj Puri and others for commission of offences u/s 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code (IPC). The main allegation in the complaint was that Sh. Shiv Raj Puri, Relationship Manager of the Bank, had opened a joint account (A/c No. 5011666247) in the said Bank in the names of his relatives, Sh. Prem Nath, Smt. Sheila Prem Nath and Smt. Deeksha Puri. The said Shiv Raj Puri had been showing a copy of a Circular said to have been issued by SEBI to investors for investing huge amounts into the account. Further, he also issued forged Term Deposit Receipts and forged bank statements to the investors with the intention to cheat them. Furthermore, Shiv Raj Puri, in his personal capacity and without informing the investors, invested their money in brokerage companies through the aforesaid Joint Account No. 5011666247. It was also found that huge part of the money was transferred from the said account to the account of one M/s G2S Management Consultant and in the accounts opened in the names of his relatives and associates in other banks.
