Ansuhka Mansharamani
On 16th December, the Karnataka High Court allowed the petition filed by the International Human Rights Body, Amnesty International’s India offices, which challenged the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for the communication issued to the banks for instructing them to freeze the accounts that were held by the trust.
A bench led by P S Dinesh Kumar allowed the petition partly and allowed the withdrawal of Rs. 60 Lakh from the bank accounts.
The Enforcement Directorate had earlier declined to review the suggestion made by the Court for allowing the petitioner to make statutory dues up to Rs 40 lakh per month.
This due, if allowed, would have been made from the five accounts which were mentioned in the ED’s communication to banks but were not a part of the order passed on 26th November.
Senior Advocate Ravivarma Kumar, representing the petitioners, prayed for interim relief and submitted that they have been harassed and they only intended to work for human rights.
He further stated that,
“Seizure has taken place and no reasons have been recorded and no order is passed and within 30 days matter is not taken before the adjudicating authority as prescribed. Therefore, it is ultra vires of section 17 (1) (A) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).”
Ravivarma Kumar contended that the donations are only for upholding Human Rights, and there is no profit goal behind it.
He highlighted the fact that in the 26th November order, there is no mention of any particular accounts defiled with a donation under the FEMA or PMLA Act.
He asserted that the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is a self-contained code having self-limiting powers that operate for 30 days.
Further, he submitted that,
“I have made out a prima facie case, the balance of convenience is in my favour and the org will be choked, if the interim order will not be made. It will be a great fraud to any human rights activities carried out in this country, which is a constitutional value.”
ASG M B Nargund, representing the ED, contended that the petitioners have an alternate remedy available under the statute and an appellate authority. Therefore, claiming that it is not a fit case for granting interim relief.
He further stated that they are in the process of investigation, and as the matter was brought to the court they could not proceed any further.
He lastly stated that “These proceeds of the crime are at this point being used according to them for creating awareness in the society. According to us, it is to create problems in Indian society.”
After the seizure of the bank accounts, Amnesty International in September announced that they would stop its India operations.