sekarreporter1: [11/29, 19:01] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1729855538832298492?t=SHGmmp0GPSKa6uFeVM62nw&s=08 [11/29, 19:02] sekarreporter1: We make it clear that this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petitions on merits uninfluenced by any of the observation/conclusion we have reached in this order for the purpose of interim relief, pending disposal of the main writ petitions. 19. This Court sincerely appreciates the way in which the respondent had responded to

[11/29, 19:03] sekarreporter1: [11/29, 19:01] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1729855538832298492?t=SHGmmp0GPSKa6uFeVM62nw&s=08
[11/29, 19:02] sekarreporter1: We make it clear that this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petitions on merits uninfluenced by any of the observation/conclusion we have reached in this order for the purpose of interim relief, pending disposal of the main writ petitions.
19. This Court sincerely appreciates the way in which the respondent had responded to these writ petitions within a short time. A detailed affidavit of objection is filed by the respondent raising several issues. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners requested time to file reply in response to the objection in the form of affidavit. The learned Additional Solicitor General also submitted that they may be permitted to file a detailed counter affidavit.
20. Post the matters on 21.12.2023 for hearing of the main writ petitions. If the respondent wants to file any additional counter or objections in the form of affidavit, the same may also be served on the counsel on record for the petitioners in these cases within a period of two weeks. The petitioners are also at liberty to file their rejoinder in advance before the next date of hearing.

Index : yes/no (S.S.S.R.,J.) (S.M.,J.) Neutral citation : yes/no 28.11.2023
ss 
S.S.SUNDAR,J.
AND
SUNDER MOHAN,J.
ss

W.P.Nos.33459 to 33468 of 2023
28.11.2023
[11/29, 19:05] sekarreporter1: It is to be noted that even the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary has observed that the respondent even if it had unearthed any particular offence and found proceeds of crime relating to the said offence, then under Section 66(2), the respondent is bound to inform the investigating agency about such offence. Only if the offence is scheduled offence, the respondent will get a right to further investigate the proceeds of crime, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Having regard to the interpretation of various provisions by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is prima facie convinced that the nature of enquiry contemplated by issuing the impugned summons is not within the jurisdiction of the
respondent. It is just an attempt to investigate the possibility of identifying any proceeds of crime as a result of any criminal activity, which is not so far registered by the State agencies. Since this Court is prima facie convinced that the enquiry contemplated by the impugned summons is not within the domain or within the authority of the respondent, as per Section 50 of the PMLA, 2002, is inclined to grant an order of interim stay of operation of the summons impugned in the five writ petitions, namely, W.P.Nos.33459, 33460, 33461, 33462 & 33467 of 2023. Accordingly, being convinced that there is a prima facie case and balance of convenience in favour of petitioners, there shall be an order of interim stay of operation of the impugned