Won't Act On Eviction Notices Against Shilpa Shetty & Raj Kundra Till Their Plea Against Provisional Attachment Is Decided: ED In Bombay HC

In a relief for Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty and her businessman husband Raj Kundra, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday told the Bombay High Court that it will not act upon the 'eviction notices' issued to the couple to vacate their residential house in Juhu and their Farm House in Pune.

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan said it will dispose of the petition by recording the statement made by the ED counsel and stated in the order that the eviction notices should not be acted upon till the couple files application against the confirmation order passed by the adjudicating authority.

"We will say that let the petitioners file their application for stay of the order of confirmation of the provisional attachment of the properties by the ED, before the Appellate Authority and it be decided. Till then the eviction notices will not be acted upon. And if the Appellate Authority decides the said application against the petitioners, then also, the eviction notices would not be operational for two weeks thereafter," Justice Mohite-Dere told advocate Prashant Patil appearing for the Kundra couple.

The Kundra couple in its petition had sought orders to protect their right and shelter of their family against the "meaningless, reckless and arbitrary act" on the part of the ED for issuing eviction notices September 27, 2024 directing the couple to vacate their properties - the residential house in Mumbai and the Farm House in Pune, within 10 days.The couple was served with the eviction notice on October 3rd.

The couple has been facing the action since 2018 when the ED lodged a case against one Amit Bharadwaj in an alleged crypto assets ponzi scheme wherein the Kunda couple allegedly with other co-accused duped investors of over Rs 6 crores in the form of Bitcoins.

The petition stated that the couple has been co-operating with the ED, which has lodged a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). It further states that the couple has attended to all the summons sent to them by the ED between 2018 and 2024.

"In the month of April 2024, to the utter surprise of the petitioners, they received a notice of the order passed by the ED provisionally attaching their assets, including their residential premises which were bought in the year 2009 by the father of the Petitioner No. 1 (Raj Kundra). Post the service of provisional order of attachment, both the petitioners were summoned and they personally attended the office wherein their statements were recorded," the petition stated.

The petition further stated that the couple even filed a response to the order of provisional attachment, however, bypassing the laws, the adjudication authority confirmed the order of the provisional attachment on September 18.

"The said confirmation order itself states that the attachment which is being confirmed is only till the conclusion of trial and is subject to its outcome. As per the provisions of PMLA, the confirmation order is subject to a challenge and a said challenge is required to be made within 45 days from the receipt of the said order. However, solely based on the confirmation order, the petitioners are being served with the eviction notices, asking them to vacate their residential premises in which they are living for more than 15 years," the plea pointed out.

By virtue of the said notice which is arbitrary and is against the provisions of law, the enforcement directorate is essentially curtailing the right of the petitioners to challenge the order of confirmation before the appellate authority, the plea added.

Further, it was pointed out that the said properties have been bought through their 'legitimate' source of income and not from the alleged 'proceeds of crime.' It is also highlighted that the couple is not a 'direct or indirect' beneficiary to the proceeds of crime.