Bombay HC in the case of AJE India Private Limited Versus Union of India

Case Covered:

AJE India Private Limited

Versus

Union of India

Facts of the Case:

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to quash the order dated 18th/19th November 2020 passed by respondent No.2 provisionally attaching the bank accounts of the petitioner maintained with respondent No.3.

The matter was heard on 17th December 2020 on the interim prayer on which date Mr.Mishra had also produced the record in original which we have perused.

Observations:

We have perused the original record produced by Mr.Mishra which discusses investigation under section 67 and therefore, the need to take action under section 83. Whether recourse to section 83 is warranted at this stage has not been dealt with in the record. Merely because there is a proceeding under section 67 would not mean that recourse to such a drastic power as under section 83 would be an automatic consequence, more so when the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation. That apart, section 83 speaks of provisional attachment of any property including bank account. The record is silent as to whether any attempt has been made for provisional attachment of any property of the petitioner and instead why the bank accounts should be attached. Besides, by use of the word “may” in subsection (1) of section 83 Parliament has made it quite clear that exercise of such a power is discretionary. When discretion is vested in authority, such discretion has to be exercised in a just and judicious manner, more so when the power conferred under section 83 admittedly is a very drastic power having serious ramifications. Such power having the potential to adversely affect property rights of persons, as well as life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, has to be exercised in a fair and reasonable manner.

Related Topic:
Bombay HC in the case of GGS Infrastructure Private Limited

The Decision of the Court:

Consequently, we stay the impugned order dated 18th/ 19th November 2020 and direct withdrawal of the provisional attachment of the bank accounts of the petitioner mentioned in the said order forthwith. However, the petitioner shall furnish an undertaking before the Court by way of affidavit that it shall not alienate its land, building, plant, and machinery during the pendency of the present proceeding.

Stand over to 9th March 2021 for the final hearing.

The record produced by Mr.Mishra is hereby returned.

This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

Read & Download the Full Decision in pdf: