Writ Court Can't Determine Whether A Case Warrants Action U/S 8(4) PMLA, Appellate Authority Appropriate Forum: J&K&L High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently observed that the question whether a particular case is of exceptional nature or not to warrant action under Section 8 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act can be determined only by the appellate authority at the time of considering the merits of the appeal and not by a Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. The court noted that while an aggrieved person has a right of appeal against the order of attachment passed by the Adjudicating Authority which the aggrieved person has to avail within 45 days of receipt of order of attachment, the authorized officer or the Director has the jurisdiction to "forthwith" take possession of the property attached. Deliberating further on the issue the bench observed that the jurisdiction to proceed under Section 8 of the PMLA would come into play immediately upon passing of the order of attachment by the Adjudicating Authority and there is no scope to interpret the provisions contained in Section 8 and Section 26 of the PMLA and Rule 5 of the Rules of 2013 to hold that for taking action under Section 8 of the PMLA, the authorized officer has to await the expiry of period of limitation i.e., 45 days. 2022 LiveLaw 633, that resort to action under Section 8 of the PMLA should be only by way of an exception and not as a rule, the bench answered that there can be no dispute to the legal position in this regard, as has been clearly spelled out by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case but the question whether a particular case is of exceptional nature or not, can be determined only by the appellate authority at the time of considering the merits of the appeal and not by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.