As per case facts, the petitioner received a show cause notice under the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, 2002), concerning the retention of seized movable properties, including cash, digital ... devices, and documents. The petitioner contended that despite multiple requests to the Adjudicating Authority and the Enforcement Directorate, they had not been provided with all the "Relied Upon Documents" in a complete and bound paper book format, as mandated by procedural regulations. This alleged non-compliance hindered their ability to submit a proper reply to the show cause notice. The question arose whether the Adjudicating Authority was obligated to ensure the complete supply of all "Relied Upon Documents" to the petitioner, as per procedural regulations, before proceeding with the hearing and deciding on the retention of properties. Finally, the court directed the Adjudicating Authority to first determine if the requested documents are indeed "Relied Upon Documents" and, if so, to instruct the Enforcement Directorate to supply them within two weeks. Following this, the petitioner must be granted two weeks to file a supplementary reply. The court also clarified that parties aggrieved by the Adjudicating Authority's order regarding document supply could take appropriate steps, including an appeal under PMLA, 2002, and vacated any interim orders.