JM FINANCIAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, MUMBAI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 20.02.2026 + MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 9/2024 JM FINANCIAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED .....Appellant Through: Ms.Shruti Raina, Ms.Priyal Sarawagi and Mr.Vansh Dhall, Advs. versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, MUMBAI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Anurag Jain, Adv. for ED/R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘PMLA’), challenging the order dated 26.04.2024 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA, New Delhi in Appeal bearing No. FPA-PMLA-3223/MUM/2019, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant herein with the following direction: “32. It is however clarified that the outcome of the appeal would not affect the right of the appellant ultimately if the subject property is taken under section 8 (8) of the Act of 2002, rather they would be at liberty to make rightful claim under section 8 (8) of the Act of 2002. In Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed MISC. APPEAL(PMLA) 9/2024 Page 1 of 5 By:REYMON VASHIST Signing Date:21.02.2026 17:40:55 case of acquittal of the accused, resulting in re-release of property from attachment, again the appellants can pursue their rights for which this order would not come in their way.” 2. The learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 raises a preliminary objection on the maintainability of the present appeal before this Court. He submits that not only is the appellant, even as per the Memo of Parties, situated in Mumbai, the entire proceedings have also taken place in Maharashtra. He submits that the jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked only becau