Directorate Enforcement and ANR


Quick Summary
This case concerns the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on the duration of provisional attachment orders issued under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The petitioners argued that the 180-day period for the attachment order had expired during the lockdown, rendering the order invalid. The Directorate Enforcement contended otherwise, leading the High Court to examine the interplay between statutory timelines and the unprecedented circumstances of the pandemic.

Court :
ITAT New Delhi

Brief :
This petition raises an interesting question of the effect of the lockdown declared by the Central Government due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the period of the Provisional Attachment Orders passed under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

Citation :
W.P.(C) 3551/2020 & 12626/2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 08.09.2020
Date of Decision: 18.11.2020

W.P.(C) 3551/2020 & 12626/2020
M/S VIKAS WSP LTD. & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: 
Mr.Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Arshdeep Singh, Mr.Akshat Gupta, Mr.Sanjeevi Seshadri, Ms.Rajshree Sharma, Advs.

versus

DIRECTORATE ENFORCEMENT & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: 
Mr.Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Ms.Mallika Hiremath and Mr.Atul Tripathi, Advs.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

1. This petition raises an interesting question of the effect of the lockdown declared by the Central Government due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the period of the Provisional Attachment Orders passed under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

BRIEF FACTS:

2. The respondent no. 1, in exercise of its powers under Section 5(1) of the Act, passed a Provisional Attachment Order dated 13.11.2019, provisionally attaching certain properties of the petitioners amounting to
Rs. 52,21,16,797/-, for a period of 180 days from the date of the said order.

3. The respondent no.1 thereafter, in terms of Section 5(5) of the Act, filed a complaint, being OC No.1228/2019, before the Adjudicating Authority on 05.12.2019.

4. The Adjudicating Authority, on 18.12.2019, issued a Show Cause Notice under Section 8(1) of the Act to the petitioners. However, before the proceedings could be concluded, on 23.03.2020, the Government of India declared a nationwide lockdown with effect from 24.03.2020 due to the spread of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

5. The lockdown declared by the Government of India was partially lifted on 20.04.2020 and the Adjudicating Authority, admittedly, began functioning in a restricted manner thereafter.

6. On 26.05.2020, the Adjudicating Authority issued the Impugned Notice/Summons to the petitioners by way of an e-mail, indicating the next date of hearing in the complaint to be 16.06.2020.

7. The petitioners filed the present petition on 15.06.2020 claiming therein that as the period of 180 days from the date of the Provisional Attachment Orders had expired, in terms of Section 5(3) of the Act, the said order ceased to have effect and therefore, the Adjudicating Authority had become functus officio and the proceedings in the complaint cannot proceed. Following prayers have been made in the petition:

To know more in details find the attachment file
 

FAQ :

The central issue was whether the nationwide lockdown declared due to the COVID-19 pandemic suspended or extended the 180-day period for provisional attachment orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

A Provisional Attachment Order, issued under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, is a temporary order to attach properties suspected to be involved in money laundering.

The provisional attachment order in this case was for a period of 180 days from the date it was issued.

The Government of India declared a nationwide lockdown on 23.03.2020 due to the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The petitioners argued that the 180-day period for the provisional attachment order expired during the lockdown, and therefore, the order ceased to have effect, making the Adjudicating Authority functus officio (having no further authority).

The Adjudicating Authority began functioning in a restricted manner after 20.04.2020, when the lockdown was partially lifted.

 

Guestonline
Published in LAW
Views : 152
downloaded 227 times

Comments




CCI Pro



Company
ARTICLESHIP 07 September 2026
Article/ Paid Assistant

Murali and Sumeet Chartered Accountant

Bengaluru

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
24 August 2026
Semi-Qualified CA/CA Finalist - Tax, GST, Audit & Accounts

Bharat Shah & Associates

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
09 September 2026
Semi Qualified CA / CA Inter - 2 Groups Cleared

Getmyca Consultant Pvt Ltd

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
18 September 2026
Accounts & Finance Specialist

ULTRA CHEMICAL WORKS

Thane

CA Final

View Details
Company
15 September 2026
Client-site CA associate

Aditya Muley and Co

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 01 September 2026
Article Assistant

SGNG & Associates

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 04 September 2026
Accounts Executive

Hema Yashwanth & Associates

Chennai

B.Com

View Details
Company
28 August 2026
Assistant Manager

NRS AND ASSOCIATES

Kozhikode

CA Inter

View Details