BackDelhi HC restrains ED from proceeding further on attached funds of Rana Ayyub
The Delhi high court on Wednesday restrained the Enforcement Directorate (ED) from proceeding further concerning the attached funds of journalist Rana Ayyub
PremiumAfter Rana Ayyub's filed a petition, the Delhi high court restrained the Enforcement Directorate (ED) from proceeding further concerning the provisional attachment of funds of the journalist. The law enforcement agency had attached Rana Ayyub's funds in connection with an alleged money laundering probe against her.
Justice Yashwant Varma issued notice to the investigating agency on Rana Ayyub's petition against the provisional attachment and sought a response from it within six weeks. Meanwhile, the high court has restrained Rana Ayyub from disposing of or creating any third-party rights concerning the attached funds lying in certain bank accounts.
“Till the next date of listing, the respondent (ED) shall stand restrained from taking further steps as contemplated under Section 8 (Adjudication) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The petitioner shall also stand restrained from disposing of or creating any third party rights or encumbering the property which forms the subject matter of the provisional order of attachment," ordered the court.
Rana Ayyub's petition against the attachment of funds by the ED stated that Provisional Attachment Order dated 04.02.2022 has lapsed and ceases to exist upon expiry of 180 days from the date of the Order. It also said that the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, are no longer maintainable as the authority is rendered functus officio.
The ED had attached over ₹1.77 crore of Rana Ayyub's funds in connection with a money laundering case. The ED had filed a money laundering case against Rana Ayyub after a complaint was filed against her that alleged irregularities in donor funds of over ₹2.69 crore raised by her through “Ketto".
The agency has said its probe “makes it abundantly clear that the funds were raised in the name of charity in a completely pre-planned and systematic manner, and the funds were not utilised completely for the purpose of which the funds were raised".
The court listed the case for further hearing on November 17.
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
