Nikesh Tarachand Shah vs Union Of India on 23 November, 2017
(vi) Unless there are strong and compelling reasons to believe that the
property is ―involved in money-laundering‖, resort cannot be had to
the second proviso to attach such property. Reliance is placed on the
decision of the Supreme Court in Nikesh Tarachand Shah v. Union
of India 2017 (13) SCALE 609. If the second proviso is not read
down in the above manner, it will be an instrument of oppression,
misuse and arbitrariness clothing officers with uncanalised, draconian
and arbitrary powers thereby rendering the second proviso itself
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.