Bombay High Court · 2025-01-14
THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT vs THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE GOA STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.
- Citation / case number
- IA/1958/2024
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Petitioner
- THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
- Respondent
- THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE GOA STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.
Judgment text excerpt
IA 1958-24 copy.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1958 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 3056 OF 2024 The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement .. Applicant/Appellant Versus The Branch Manager, The Goa State Co-op Bank Ltd. .. Respondent Adv. Ashish Chavan a/w Yash Palan for the Applicant/ Appellant. Digitally signed CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & ANJALI by ANJALI SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, JJ. TUSHAR TUSHAR ASWALE ASWALE Date: 2025.01.14 18:22:02 +0530 RESERVED ON: DECEMBER 09, 2024 PRONOUNCED ON: JANUARY 14, 2025 JUDGMENT:- [ Per: B. P. COLABAWALLA, J ] 1. The above Appeal is filed under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [for short the “PMLA, 2002”] by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, challenging the order dated 4th July 2018 passed by the Appellate Tribunal [constituted under the provisions of the PMLA, 2002], in FPA-PMLA-2178/AHD/2018. By the impugned order, the Page 1 of 16 JANUARY 14, 2025 Laxmi IA 1958-24 copy.docx Appellate Tribunal allowed the Appeal filed by the Respondent-Bank against the order of the Adjudicating Authority confirming the Provisional Order of the Attachment levied [under Section 5 of the PMLA, 2002] by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Surat. 2. Since there is a delay in filing the Appeal, the above Interim Application is also filed seeking a condonation of delay. Though in the Interim Application, the period of delay is not mentioned, on the basis of the lists of dates and events tendered to this Court on 9th December 2024, the delay mentioned is 132 days. 3. As recorded in our order dated 9th December, 2024, we had noted that the issue involved in the present case is whether the Court has the power to condone the del