SANJEEV KUMAR
Ahsan Ahmad Mirza – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
JUDGEMENT
1. In this petition filed under section 482, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner seeks quashing of a complaint filed by the respondent against him alleging commission of offence of money laundering under section 3, of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 ["PMLA"] as also the impugned prosecution launched against the petitioner pursuant to the order of cognizance dated 2nd December, 2019. The petitioner also prays for quashing of order dated 18th March, 2020 passed by the Designated Special Court (the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Srinagar), whereby the charges have been framed against the petitioner.
2. The short point that is raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the complaint is eventually instituted by the respondents for prosecution of the petitioner under section 3 and 4 of PMLA and what is alleged against the petitioner is misappropriation of funds of JKCA with criminal conspiracy with other accused persons and that the funds so misappropriated have been laundered by layering them into other bank accounts thereby generating proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2(1)(u) of PMLA.
3. It is submitted that with r
Ahsan Ahmad Mirza & Ors. Versus Enforcement Directorate & Anr.
Commission of a scheduled offence is essential for establishing money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires the commission of a scheduled offence as a prerequisite; without it, no offence of money laundering can be established.
The investigation under PMLA is independent of the ultimate result of the Predicate/Scheduled Offence and continues independently.
The offence of money laundering under the PMLA is a standalone, continuing offence, not dependent on the outcome of related scheduled offences, with a reverse burden of proof on the accused regarding....
(1) Money laundering – Existence of proceeds of crime is a condition precedent for applicability of Section 3 of PMLA – If there are no proceeds of crime, offence under Section 3 of PMLA is not made ....
(1) Offence of money laundering is a stand-alone offence and trial proceedings are completely different to that of scheduled offence. Trial of money laundering offence is independent trial and it is ....
The offence of money laundering is independent of the scheduled offence trials, and the trial under PMLA continues irrespective of pending proceedings related to scheduled offences.
Prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not sustainable without a registered scheduled offence, as established by the Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary.
Proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act are independent and can be based on continuing laundering activities, regardless of the scheduled offence's date of commission.
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act proceedings are independent of the predicate offence and must proceed without delay, reflecting the urgency in addressing economic crimes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.