Telangana High Court Manturi Shashi Kumar vs The Director on 17 October, 2022 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No. 45712 of 2018 ORDER: Heard Sri Vedula Srinivas learned counsel representing Smt. K. Jai Shree, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. B. Rama Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondent no. 2 in continuing attachment of the properties even after closer of C.C.No.319 of 2010 on which action was initiated under PMLA as illegal and for a consequential direction to the respondent to raise the order of attachment as confirmed by adjudicating authority in O.C.No.681 of 2017. FACTS OF THE CASE: 3. Petitioner No. 1 is Accused No.1 in F.I.R.No.369 of 2002 pending on the file of the Police Station, Patancheru. The said crime was registered on the complaint lodged by Sri. P. Sudheer Reddy. The offences alleged against the petitioner No. 1 herein are under Section 420,423,468 and 471, read with 120 B of the Indian Penal Code. The investigating officer, on completion of investigation, 2 KL,J WP.No.45712.2018 filed Charge Sheet against the 1st petitioner and others. The same was taken on the file vide C.C.No.319 of 2010, pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Special Mobile Court, Sangareddy District. During the pendency of the said C.C, a petition under Section 320 was filed vide Cr.M.P.No.126 of 2018, to record the compromise and to acquit the accused. The said petition was allowed on 30.03.2018 permitting the prosecution for withdrawal of charges levelled against the accused. The matter was referred to Lok Adalat. The said case was called for before the Lok Adalat on 20.03.2018. The Lok Adalat has recorded the compromise entered between the parties and passed an Award dated 20.03.2018. 4. An intimation letter dated 01.05.2018 was submitted to the 2nd respondent informing about the closer of the aforesaid C.C. and requested him to raise the attachment. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said letter, 2nd respondent did not act upon the same, therefore, this writ petition is filed. 5. It is relevant to note that in the aforesaid crime no. 369 of 2002 pending on the file of the Police Station, Patancheru, one of the offences is a predicate offence. According to 2nd respondent, the investigation conducted under the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act. (herein after referred to as PMLA for brevity) has revealed that the 1st petitioner/A1 in crime no. 369 of 2002, by using proceeds of crime had purchased immovable properties in his name as well as in 3 KL,J WP.No.45712.2018 the name of his wife namely Smt. Swapna, 2nd petitioner herein during the relevant period. During the course of investigation, petitioner no. 1 could not show any licit income for purchase of such properties, in his name and in the name of his wife. They have no income of their own, however, immovable properties purchased in the name of the 2nd petitioner by the 1st petitioner by using the proceeds of crime derived as a result of criminal activity and with a view to obscure the identity of the properties purchased out of proceeds of crime and thus protected the properties is untainted. Since the said property found after proceeds of crime in terms of Section 2(1)(u) of the Act and has been attached under Section 5 (1) of the Act to make the properties available for confiscation after conclusion of the trial for the offences of money laundering. 6. The Enforcement Directorate had also filed a complaint as contemplated under the Act before the Designated Court and the same was also taken cognizance and assigned number as S.C.No.342 of 2018. The proceedings are pending in the said case before the Designated Court. Therefore, acquittal in predicate offence has no bearing or effect in investigation or trial under the PMLA as the said Act deals only with the offences of money laundering. In the present case, the allegation against the 1st petitioner is that he along with other accused have cheated P. Sudheer Reddy and have derived the proceeds of crime as a result of criminal 4 KL,J WP.No.45712.2018 activity and thereby they have acquired the properties in the name of 2nd petiti