Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Seema Sharma, filed a criminal appeal against the order of the Special Court under the MPID Act, which confirmed the attachment of her property. The property was attached by the Competent Authority under Section 3 of the MPID Act on the ground that it was purchased from the proceeds of crime of the NSEL scam. The appellant claimed that she had purchased the property from her own legitimate sources, including sale of ancestral property and loans from relatives. However, the court found that the appellant failed to provide satisfactory evidence to prove the source of funds. The court noted that the property was purchased in 2013, during the period when the NSEL scam was ongoing, and the appellant's husband was a director of a company involved in the scam. The court held that the appellant did not discharge the burden of proof, and the attachment was justified. The appeal was dismissed, and the interim application was disposed of.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attachment of Property - MPID Act - Section 3 - Proceeds of Crime - The appellant claimed that the attached property was purchased from her own funds, but the court found that she failed to provide satisfactory evidence of legitimate source of funds. The property was purchased during the period when the NSEL scam was ongoing, and the appellant's husband was a director of a company involved in the scam. The court held that the attachment was justified as the appellant did not discharge the burden of proof. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Burden of Proof - MPID Act - Section 3 - The burden is on the claimant to prove that the property was acquired from legitimate sources. The appellant's claim of funds from sale of ancestral property and loans was not supported by credible evidence. The court held that the appellant failed to prove the source of funds, and the property was liable to be attached. (Paras 11-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, Seema Sharma, had proved that the property attached under the MPID Act was purchased from her own legitimate sources and not from the proceeds of crime of the NSEL scam.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of attachment is confirmed. Interim application disposed of.
Law Points
- Attachment of property under MPID Act
- Proceeds of crime
- Burden of proof on claimant
- Legitimate source of funds
- NSEL scam
