As a dedicated follower who has witnessed the ups and downs of the Bollywood industry for decades, I must say that the latest development in Shilpa Shetty’s case is a breath of fresh air. It’s heartening to see justice being sought through legal means and the due process being followed. The fact that the Enforcement Directorate has decided to hold off on the eviction notices until the appeal is reviewed speaks volumes about our judicial system’s commitment to fairness.
On Thursday, October 10, 2024, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) told the Bombay High Court that they will not carry out the eviction orders sent to actress Shilpa Shetty and her husband Raj Kundra for now. These orders were given due to a property attachment case. On September 27, the ED had asked them to vacate their residence in Mumbai’s Juhu area and a farmhouse in Pune as part of an investigation into alleged money laundering. However, they are allowed to stay until the appellate tribunal has looked into and resolved their appeal against this property attachment order.
The duo was given permission by Justices Revati Mohite Dere and P.K. Chavan to file an application for a halt, and they were informed that no measures concerning the eviction warnings would be taken until the higher court has decided on their case appeal.
The High Court’s hold (or suspension) on this matter persists until the appeals court based in Delhi makes a decision regarding the couple’s dispute against the PMLA tribunal’s ruling from September 18.
Furthermore, the court noted that if the higher court rules adversely towards the couple, they would have an extra two weeks before the decision could be enforced.
Based on Bar and Bench’s report, during the court proceedings, lawyer Prashant Patil emphasized that as per the rules of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), if a Property Attaching Officer (PAO) is affirmed by the judicial authority, the impacted parties have 45 days to contest this decision at the PMLA Appellate Tribunal in Delhi.
Yet, he pointed out that the agency delivered the eviction order prior to the completion of the 45-day timeframe. As such, he asked the court for a temporary halt on the eviction process.
As a lifestyle expert, I would rephrase that statement as follows: The court is considering if they can temporarily halt the eviction process until the PMLA Appellate Tribunal has made a decision on my appeal for a stay. Additionally, the court is questioning whether it would have been more appropriate for me to initially file my request with the Appellate Tribunal instead of the High Court.
The legal advisor to the Executive Director, Satya Prakash, told the court he would discuss the matter with his team and present their viewpoint. The judges, Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan, set a date for consideration of the petitions in the court.
In the course of the meeting, Prakash clarified that the Enforcement Department would hold off on executing the eviction notices until the Appellate Tribunal reviewed the couple’s request for a stay. This declaration was noted by the court and as a result, they dismissed the couple’s writ petition.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-10-11 07:22