Delhi High Court Upholds Order Attaching Properties Of Self-Styled Godman Shiv Murat Dwivedi
The Delhi Excessive Court docket has upheld an order attaching the properties of self-styled Godman Shiv Murat Dwivedi after noting that the connected immovable properties, deposits in financial institution accounts and investments in life-saving insurance policies had been made out of revenue generated out of the proceeds gained from flesh commerce and different legal conduct.
The attraction earlier than the Excessive Court docket was filed beneath Part 42 of the Prevention of Cash Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) in opposition to the last order upholding the attachment of properties by the Respondent/Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The Division Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar stated, “Whereas quite a few explanations had been tendered by the Appellant to elucidate a sound supply of revenue, the intricate investigation undertaken by the police and the Respondent/ED into the crime syndicate run by the Appellant very transparently pointed in direction of the conclusion that the connected immovable properties, deposits in financial institution accounts and investments in varied life-saving insurance policies have been made out of revenue generated out of the proceeds gained from flesh commerce and different legal conduct. The Appellant’s involvement within the offences beneath the ITP Act and MCOCA types the premise of bringing his crime syndicate beneath the ambit of cash laundering and is enough to categorize the topic properties as proceeds of crime. The Appellant, due to this fact, has certainly did not discharge the burden of proving the details in help of his declare that the connected properties are untainted and never obtained straight or not directly from legal exercise.”
Advocate Mohit Chaudhary represented the Appellant whereas Standing Counsel Rahul Tyagi represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The incident dates again to the yr 2010 when data was acquired at Police Station, Saket {that a} gang concerned in immoral trafficking of ladies was energetic close to PVR Saket and sure pimps alongside with women can be coming to the realm within the evening for soliciting clients. A raid was performed on the spot, and the Appellant, together with one Praveen Kumar and 6 girls, had been apprehended. Subsequently, an FIR was registered in opposition to these individuals for fee of offences punishable beneath Sections 4, 5 & 8 of the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITP Act). One other case was filed in opposition to the Appellant and one Praveen Kumar @ Ankit for fee of offences punishable beneath part 3 of the Maharashtra Management of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA).
In the course of the investigation, it got here to mild that the accused Shiv Murat Dwivedi was indulging in persevering with illegal actions in an organised method and had generated large wealth to the tune of Rs. 1.5 crores (approx.) from these actions. The investigation revealed that the Appellant and his associates had no authorized supply of revenue, however they accrued large wealth by repeatedly indulging within the stated legal actions. Because of this, the Respondent/ED initiated an investigation beneath PMLA. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the Provisional Attachment Order, and the Appellate Tribunal upheld the identical. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant approached the Excessive Court docket.
Arguments
One of many arguments raised by the appellant was that the scheduled offences had been registered solely in 2010, whereas the Appellant had acquired the connected property nearly 7 years earlier in 2003.
Reasoning
The Bench famous that the Appellant was discovered to be concerned in a number of legal instances alongside along with his associates between 1997 and 2003, and thus it was clear that the Appellant was not unknown to legal exercise. It was additional seen that in investigation beneath the ITP Act, a number of private diaries, cheque books, CDs, pamphlets, money to the tune of Rs. 1.55 crore, US $20, a gold arm band, cell phones, 2 Honda automobiles, and varied payments, money receipts, insurance coverage insurance policies, deposit slips, bank cards and sundry paperwork exhibiting revenue and expenditure by the Appellant for unlawful commerce had been discovered. This additionally included funds made to brokers, name women, servants.
“It’s apposite to say that with the background of Appellant’s legal historical past that comes via in mild of the investigation carried out by the Respondent/ED, this Court docket is constrained to deduce that each one the investments, and so on. carried out by the Appellant – at the least post-1997 – are linked to the legal syndicate the Appellant has been growing over time. Merely as a result of the FIR was registered in 2010 would not be enough to attract an antagonistic inference in opposition to the Respondent/ED and conclude that the connected properties haven’t any hyperlink to the predicate offences of which the Appellant is accused of”, it added.
As per the Bench, in mild of the energetic involvement within the fee of offences beneath varied penal legislations and the absence of passable rationalization concerning authorized supply of revenue, the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal that the properties connected by the Respondent/ED had been properties acquired straight or not directly from the proceeds of the Appellant’s legal exercise didn’t warrant any interference.
Thus, upholding the conclusion arrived at by the Appellate Tribunal, the Bench dismissed the attraction.
Trigger Title: Shiv Murat Dwivedi v. Directorate of Enforcement (2025:DHC:5186-DB)
Look
Appellant: Advocates Mohit Chaudhary, Kunal Sachdeva, Katyayani Vajpayee
Respondent: Standing Counsel Rahul Tyagi, Advocates Mathew M. Philip, Karan Grover, Sangeet Sibou, Aniket Kumar Singh
