Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6.2 During investigation under PMLA, 2002, the Respondent No.2 engaged the services of M/s.Terraqua UAV Solutions Private Limited (a Company incubated at IIT Kanpur and the team comprising Profession of IIT, Kanpur), to conduct a technical study of all the mining sites using Drone and LIDAR Surveys, Bathymetric suryeys, satellite imagery processing etc. in the 28 sites and nearby areas. The report on the technical study establishes that there has been excessive mining in the mining sites and there has been illegal sand mining in the nearby areas as well. It is revealed from the Expert Report submitted by M/s Terraqua UAV Solutions Private Limited, that there are violations in terms of area and depth of excavation which has resulted in excessive volume of sand excavation. Even at 4 sand quarries, there is estimate of excessive & illegal sand mining up to 10-30 times of the actual permitted quantity and as against the permitted area of 4.90 Ha, mined area of 104-105 Ha is found adjacent to the original permitted area. The Report ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.5402 of 2024 batch has evidently spelt out that the sand to the extent of 23,64,871.96 Units has been mined excessively and illegally and it was never brought in the books & records of the Govt. The total cost of the sand mined in excess in the mining sites and in the outside areas (in the Total Mining Impacted Area 987.01 Hectares and the excess volume of mining of 2364871.96 Units 6621641.5 Cubic Meter of Sand) is arriving at Rs.4730 Crores and whereas the revenue in the books of accounts of WRD has been shown as Rs. 36.45 Crores (as furnished by the Executive Engineers of the Water Resources Department, Government of Tamil Nadu).

- I & II.
14.2. The Officials (Executive Engineers and Engineer-

in-Chief) of Water Resources Department in their statements recorded under Section 50 of PMLA, 2002, have explicitly admitted regarding illegal and excessive sand mining being done in the state on a large scale and further admitted that no strict action is being taken against the persons involved in illegal mining and their associates.

12. The question involved in the instant Writ Petitions in our view is not whether there is illegal sand mining in the State. The question is whether, even assuming that the respondents have material to show that there was illegal sand mining and it had generated huge proceeds, they would be entitled to initiate action under PMLA, in the absence of a scheduled offence investigated by any other investigation agency and ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.5402 of 2024 batch determination of proceeds of crime.

24. However, the above observations are based only on the interpretation of the provisions of PMLA and on the basis of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madhanlal Choudhary's case (cited supra). We have not expressed any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the allegations or materials collected by the respondents in support of their case that there is illegal sand mining in the State and that the petitioners played an active part in the illegal sand mining and had generated huge illegal money. We are only concerned with the procedure adopted by the respondents. Even assuming that the respondents have the object to curb the illegal sand mining in the State, the procedure ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.5402 of 2024 batch prescribed under the law cannot be violated. The four FIRs which were the basis for recording the ECIR, are not even remotely connected to the petitioners. The other reasons assigned by the respondents in the provisional attachment order and in the counter affidavits to justify their action against the petitioners do not satisfy the requirements under the PMLA, as reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madhanlal Choudhary's case (cited supra).