Delhi’s High Court’s Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath today allowed ED’s provisional order of attaching assets of Himachal Pradesh CM Virbhadra Singh’s two children in a money laundering case to continue..The Bench also stated that all subsequent proceedings against them would remain stayed..The short order says,.“We consider it appropriate to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order of provisional attachment so far as the petitioners herein are concerned. .However, the impugned attachment shall continue. We also make it clear that the period of stay pursuant to the present order shall not be taken into consideration for computing the period of 180 days stipulated for operation of the provisional attachment under Section 5(1) of the PML Act.”.The order was passed in a petition filed by Singh’s daughter Aprajita Kumari and son Vikramaditya Singh who had challenged the ED order of March 23 that had allowed for provisional attachment of Singh’s assets in the ongoing investigation into money laundering and disproportionate assets..The said order was assailed by Singh’s children, Aprajita Kumari and Vikramaditya Singh, who had termed it as ‘presumptuous’ and ‘arbitrary’. The plea had also stated that the ED ‘overstepped’ its jurisdiction whilst passing its order. The Petitioners had further challenged the recently amended second proviso of section 5 (1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), claiming it should be declared unconstitutional as it was contradictory to the scheme of the Act and violated the Constitution..While discussing the constitutional aspect of this provision, the Bench has said that the issue requires further deliberation..Therefore, the case has been posted for further hearing on July 18.
Delhi’s High Court’s Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath today allowed ED’s provisional order of attaching assets of Himachal Pradesh CM Virbhadra Singh’s two children in a money laundering case to continue..The Bench also stated that all subsequent proceedings against them would remain stayed..The short order says,.“We consider it appropriate to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order of provisional attachment so far as the petitioners herein are concerned. .However, the impugned attachment shall continue. We also make it clear that the period of stay pursuant to the present order shall not be taken into consideration for computing the period of 180 days stipulated for operation of the provisional attachment under Section 5(1) of the PML Act.”.The order was passed in a petition filed by Singh’s daughter Aprajita Kumari and son Vikramaditya Singh who had challenged the ED order of March 23 that had allowed for provisional attachment of Singh’s assets in the ongoing investigation into money laundering and disproportionate assets..The said order was assailed by Singh’s children, Aprajita Kumari and Vikramaditya Singh, who had termed it as ‘presumptuous’ and ‘arbitrary’. The plea had also stated that the ED ‘overstepped’ its jurisdiction whilst passing its order. The Petitioners had further challenged the recently amended second proviso of section 5 (1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), claiming it should be declared unconstitutional as it was contradictory to the scheme of the Act and violated the Constitution..While discussing the constitutional aspect of this provision, the Bench has said that the issue requires further deliberation..Therefore, the case has been posted for further hearing on July 18.