Shilpa Shetty, Raj Kundra move Bombay High Court against eviction notice by ED

The notice directs them to vacate their bungalow near Pawana Dam in Pune and their flat in Santa Cruz, Mumbai following orders from the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA in New Delhi.
Shilpa Shetty, Raj Kundra and Bombay HC
Shilpa Shetty, Raj Kundra and Bombay HC
Published on
2 min read

Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty and her husband Raj Kundra have moved the Bombay High Court challenging eviction notices issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) following the provisional attachment of their residential properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The notice directs them to vacate their bungalow near Pawana Dam in Pune and their flat in Santa Cruz, Mumbai following orders from the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA in New Delhi.

A Bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and PK Chavan will hear the petition on October 10, Thursday.

The case dates back to 2018 when ED began investigating one Amit Bhardwaj in connection with a money laundering case. Neither Shetty nor Kundra were named as accused in the scheduled offence or the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR).

However, in April 2024, the couple was served a notice by the ED provisionally attaching their assets, including their residences.

Shetty and Kundra have claimed that they have been cooperative throughout the investigation, with Kundra personally attending multiple summons and Shetty submitting the necessary documents through her authorized representative.

They stated that despite their cooperation, the ED confirmed the provisional attachment of their assets on September 18, 2024, with the attachment remaining in effect until the conclusion of the trial.

Under the PMLA, the couple had 45 days to challenge the confirmation order before the appellate authority.

However, on October 3, 2024, they were served with an eviction notice dated September 27, 2024, demanding they vacate their residences.

The couple have argued that the eviction notice is arbitrary and against legal provisions, claiming that the ED is effectively curtailing their right to challenge the confirmation order.

They have also cited the Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India, which prohibits eviction prior to conviction under such circumstances.

The plea has been filed through advocates Prashant Patil, Swapnil Ambure, Nida Khan and Poorva Joshi.

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com