IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

MADURAI BENCH
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.P. (MD) NO. 27391 OF 2023

1. R.M. Sivagami Aachi

W/O- R.M. Ramanathan
11/4, Saravana Street
T. Nagar
Chennai-600017

2. P.L. Muthuveerappan
S/O- C. Palaniyappa Chettiar
No. 77, Third South Cross Street
Mariyappa Nagar
Annamalai Nagar
Cuddalore District-608002
……. Petitioner

Vs
1. The Registrar,
Appellate Tribunal
Prevention of Money Laundering
New Delhi

2. The Deputy Director

Directorate of Enforcement,

Page 1 of 9
 Government of India
III Floor, C-Block
Murugesan Naicker Complex
No. 84, Greams Road, Thousand Lights
Chennai-600006.

…… Respondents

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

I, Brijesh Beniwal, S/o Babu Singh Beniwal, Male, aged about- 34 years,
working as Assistant Director in the Directorate of Enforcement, No. 1A,
P&T Nagar Main Road, Madurai-625017 do hereby solemnly affirm and
sincerely state as follows: -

1. It is respectfully submitted that I am the deponent herein and as such I am

well acquainted with the facts of the case from the perusal of the records,
and I am authorized to file this counter affidavit on behalf of the 2 nd
Respondent.

2. I submit that I have gone through the affidavit in the subject Writ Petition
and I deny all the material allegations and averments made by the
petitioner there under as false and incorrect except those that are
specifically admitted hereunder and the petitioners are put to strict proof of
the same. I submit that I am filing this affidavit to place on record certain
facts for the kind appreciation of this Hon’ble Court. I further crave leave
of this Hon’ble Court to file an additional affidavit in the event of
necessity, with the permission of this Hon’ble Court.

Page 2 of 9
3. It is submitted that the 2 nd Respondent/Department is an investigating
agency, functioning under the Government of India, Ministry of Finance
and is empowered to investigate into the matters of the Prevention of
Money Laundering Act,2002 (hereinafter referred to as PMLA for the sake
of brevity). The Directorate of Enforcement is the only designated
authority to investigate into the matters under the PMLA.

Brief facts of the case:

4. It is humbly submitted that the Inspector of Police, Keelevalavu Police

Station, Madurai District had registered an FIR No.196/2012 dated
07.09.2012 for offences committed under Section 447,379,406,420 of IPC,
1860 read with Section 3 of TNPPFL and Section 4(1)A, 4(2)A, 4(3) and
21(b)5 of Mines and Minerals Development Regulation Act, 1957.

5. It is humbly submitted that after completion of their investigation in the

abovementioned FIR, final report was filed on 19.08.2013 and 10.01.2014
before the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate, Melur wherein the Accused
persons were charged for committing offences under Section 120B, 147,
447, 379, 420, 430, 434, 465, 467, 468, 471, 304 r/w 114,511 of IPC, 1860
and Section 3(i), 3(ii) & 4 of TNP(PD&L) Act,1992 r/w Section 3(a) & 6
of Explosive Substance Act,1908 and thereby violated the conditions of
lease in the said Lease order, removed the boundary marks installed by the
Government, trespassed into the adjoined Government Poramboke Land in
Survey No. 288/17& 267/1, used Explosive and Machines and without
leaving the safety area as prescribed by the Government, illegally quarried

Page 3 of 9
 and mined granites and sold them and thereby caused wrongful loss of Rs.
717.20Crores to the Government between the period from 2010 to 2012.

6. It is humbly submitted that on the basis of the FIR No.196/2012 dated

07.09.2012 filed by the Inspector of Police, Keelavalavu and on the basis
of the Final Report dated 19.08.2013 and 10.01.2014 before the Hon’ble
Judicial Magistrate, Melur under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C, 1973 and on
the basis of the aforesaid information/copies of documents and in as much
as certain offences alleged were under Section 120B, 420, 467 & 471 of
IPC, 1860 and Section 3(a) & 4 (a) of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908
are covered under the Scheduled Offences under Section 2(1)(y) of PMLA,
2002 and in the aforesaid charge sheets the offences thus charged were
covered under the list of Scheduled Offences and prima facie, the persons
accused in the abovementioned FIR appeared to have committed an
offence of money laundering under Section 3 of PMLA, an Enforcement
Case Information Report (ECIR) was registered vide ECIR/CEZO/13/2015
dated 31.12.2015 for conducting investigation under the provisions of
PMLA, 2002 and accordingly, investigation was initiated.
7. It is humbly submitted that during the course of the investigation voluntary
statements were recorded, relevant documents/details were obtained from
other agencies and after thorough investigation Provisional Attachment
Order No. 23/2016 under section 5(1) of PMLA, 2002 was issued and the
same was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority in OC No. 674 of 2017
vide its order dated 31.05.2017.
It is humbly submitted that the instant Writ Petition has been filed by the Writ-
Petitioners with a prayer to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1 st
Respondent to dispose off the appeals in FPA-PMLA-4983/CHN/2022 and
FPA-PMLA-6326/CHN/2023 in OC No. 674/2017 pending before the

Page 4 of 9
8. It is humbly submitted that during the course of investigation a letter dated
01.11.2016 was addressed by the Directorate of Enforcement to the Sub-
Registrar, Theppakulam requesting him to provide details of registration of
any immovable property registered in the names of the persons under
investigation viz. Defendants 1 to 5 in Provisional Attachment Order,
either as a Claimant or as an Executant along with the latest Encumbrance
Certificate of the said immovable property.
9. It is humbly submitted that in response, the said SRO vide letter dated
25.11.2016, enclosed 39 documents related to the persons mentioned in the
Directorate's reference. The said 39 documents included the documents
relating to the properties attached and described in Sl. No. xii & xxv of
Schedule-A of the Para 33 of PAO dated 22.12.2016 and that the main
contention of the Petitioners herein is that they are possessing the said
lands in the status of a cultivating tenancy and have only lease cultivating
tenancy rights on the said lands and submitted that although the document
may evidence that the Defendants have only a cultivating tenancy right.
10. It is humbly submitted that in respect of both the properties mentioned
above, inter alia, stated that the consideration amount of Rs.81,000/- and
Rs 50,000/- were paid being the market value to the executants and thereby
the cultivation rights have been transferred to Shri S. Sankaranarayanan &
Shri P.K.M. Selvam and these transactions were made as disguised sales
which are common where the actual owner is not available and that the
person in the possession of the lands for many years doing cultivation,
instead of making sale deed (since he is prohibited as he is not the legal
owner) would normally while selling make only a made- over deed only
and therefore, the defendants are the legal owners of the said properties
and that the appellants should have been aware of the present FIRs, etc.,
and that since the property has been on perpetual lease, which creates an

Page 5 of 9
 interest over the property and the same is not transferable, it could clearly
be construed that the property has actually been sold and that in the above
facts and circumstances it was submitted that there was no necessity of
issuing notice to the present appellants and prayed for dismissal of the
appeal.
11.
12. It is submitted that a First Information Report in Cr. No. 06/2016 dated
02.06.2016 was reported by the Economic Offences Wing – II, Madurai
against M/s. Disc Agrotech limited and others based on a complaint given
by Smt M. Pechiammal, W/o. Shri P. Madasamy. After completion of
investigation, the EOW - II, Madurai, filed a Final Report in CC No.
09/2019 before the Hon’ble Special Court for TNPID Cases, Madurai
against M/s Disc Assets Lead India Limited, M/s. Dal Marketing Solutions
Limited, M/s Dal Provision Lead India Limited, M/s. Aiyan Marketing
Private limited and its Directors based on the Complaints received from
2400 depositors of Disc Assets Lead India Limited from various places in
Tamil Nadu and other parts of India and the case is now pending trial as on
date. It is submitted that SEBI had also conducted investigation into the
alleged illegal mobilization of funds by M/s. Disc Agrotech Limited @
Disc Asset Promoters India Limited @ Disc Asset Lead India Limited
(DALIL). From the year 2006, the Company was mobilizing funds under
the scheme of “sale/purchase, development and maintenance of
agricultural land” with a promise of profit/return/Estimated value at the
end of the scheme period. The Company had carried on two schemes –
“Installment Land Purchase Scheme” and “Cash Down Land Purchase
Scheme”.

Page 6 of 9
13. It is further submitted that after due examination of the above reference
from the SEBI and the Criminal Case in Cr. No. 06/2016 dated 02.06.2016
registered by the Economic Offences Wing of the Tamil Nadu Police for
offences under Sections 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
read with Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors
( in Financial Establishment ) Act , 1997, there appears to be a prima facie
case of Money Laundering under section 3 of PMLA, which is punishable
under Section 4 of the said Act as out of the offences mentioned above,
Sections 120B & 420 of IPC are Scheduled Offenses under Paragraph 1 of
Part A of the Schedule of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act
( PMLA) 2002. Therefore, a case was registered and was taken up for
investigation under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering
Act, 2002 and the Rules framed there under and ECIR No.
ECIR/MDSZO/04/2018 was registered.

14. It is submitted that on a reasonable belief that the proceeds of the crime,
which were in the form of the immovable properties were likely to be
further concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which may
result in frustrating any proceedings relating to Confiscation of such
Proceeds of Crime under the PMLA, 2002, the Deputy Director of
Enforcement, Chennai in exercise of the powers conferred under section
5(1) of the PMLA, 2002, issued the Provisional Attachment Order in PAO
No. 01/2021(MDSZO) dated 12.01.2021. The said Provisional Attachment
Order was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority, PMLA vide its Order
dated 22.12.2021 in OC No. 1398/2021.

15. It is humbly submitted that Prosecution Complaint under section 45 of

PMLA, 2002 was filed before the Hon’ble Principal District Judge,

Page 7 of 9
 Chennai in Spl.CC No. 06/2021 on the file of the Hon’ble VIII Additional
District Court for CBI cases, Chennai and the trial is going on.

16. It is further submitted that the petitioner, in his affidavit had wrongly stated
that his property in Plot No.3 bearing S.Nos. 10/5, 10/5A, 83/5 at Anaiyur
Village Bit II is situated at Madurai (North) Taluk. Whereas the property is
actually situated at Madurai (South) Taluk.

17. It is humbly submitted that, in so far as the averments in Para 01 to 06 are

concerned, the property pertaining to the instant petitioner was
inadvertently attached under the provisions of PMLA and can be treated as
a clerical error due to the nature of the case as a large number of properties
(1081 immovable properties ) were attached in this case. The property
which was part of the Proceeds of Crime generated, intended to be attached
vide PAO no. 01/2021 is Plot No. 5 bearing Survey No 8/3 at Nayakanpatti
village registered with Thamaraipatty SRO, Madurai North District vide
Deed No. 1017/2015 dated 23.06.2015 in the name of the accused Mr.
D.V. Sreedhar. However, due to inadvertent typographical error, instead
of Thamaraipatty SRO, the property in Plot No. 3, bearing S.Nos 10/5,
10/5A, 83/5 at Anaiyur village, Bit II, Madurai South Joint – IV SRO was
mentioned in the impugned PAO No. 01/2021(MDSZO) and this property
was encumbered by the said SRO and restricted from the sale/purchase of
said property in compliance of the said provisional attachment order and
subsequent confirmation order issued by Hon’ble Adjudicating Authority,
New Delhi.

10. It is further submitted that, a Corrigendum to the impugned PAO No.

01/2021 ( MDSZO) will be issued shortly whereby the Sub Registrar of

Page 8 of 9
 Madurai South Joint –IV will be directed to release the property of the
instant petitioner and Thamaraipatty SRO, Madurai will be directed to
encumber the property which is part of the Proceeds of Crime generated by
the Accused and registered vide Doc No. 1017 /2015 registered in the said
Thamaraipatty SRO.

It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to

dismiss the writ petition and pass further order that this Hon’ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the above case and thus render
Justice.

Solemnly affirmed at Madurai Before Me

On this day of August, 2023
and has signed his name
in my Presence at Madurai
Advocate

Page 9 of 9