Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, N. SENTHILKUMAR
S. K. Karthikeyan – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Director, Director of Enforcement, Chennai – Respondent
ORDER :
Prayer: Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the Learned Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, VIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai in Crl. M.P. No. 3465 of 2023 dated 12.10.2023 in C.C. No. 60 of 2016.
1. Under assail is the judgment dated 12th October, 2023 passed in Crl. M.P. No. 3465 of 2023 in C.C. No. 60 of 2016.
2. The petitioners instituted a petition for discharge under Section 239 of Criminal Procedure Code, which was rejected by the Special Court for CBI Cases. The petitioners are Accused Nos. 8 and 14 respectively.
BRIEF FACTS:
3. Tripartite agreement between A1-Srinivasan and the petitioners herein were signed on 13.02.2008, whereby, inter-alia possession of a company was handed over to A1-Srinivasan and the 1st petitioner and other shareholders sold their respective shareholding to A1. Pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.02.2008 entered into between A6/Company represented by A1 and Annur Jayabalaji Textiles, machineries were purchased by A6 out of proceeds of crime and such machineries were delivered and installed in
A discharge petition under PMLA requires a prima facie case to be established; if such a case exists, the trial must proceed.
The court affirmed that under the PMLA, indirect involvement in money laundering suffices for prosecution, and the burden of proof rests on the accused to prove their innocence.
The court upheld the necessity of trial for charges framed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, emphasizing that prima facie evidence supports the petitioner’s involvement in fraudulent acti....
The PMLA's application is concerned with the ongoing nature of financial misconduct, allowing proceedings even for actions predating its enforcement, where evidence showcases potential 'proceeds of c....
The offence of money laundering under PMLA is independent and continuous, allowing for supplementary complaints based on established proceeds of crime.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the PMLA is an independent sui generis Act, and the complainant is required to prove the case independently, without presuming the derivation ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
