The offence of money laundering under PMLA is independent and continuous, allowing for supplementary complaints based on established proceeds of crime.

ORDER :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

PRAYER: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the complaint in C.C.No.60 of 2016 on the file of the VIII Additional District Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai and quash the same as far as the petitioner is concerned.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The lis on hand has been instituted to quash the Additional/Supplementary complaint filed under Section 45 r/w Sections 3, 4, 8(5) and 70(1)(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred as PMLA).

2. A Tri-Party Agreement dated 12.11.2007 was executed between A1/Mr.G.Srinivasan, petitioner and petitioner's family and VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited, whereby, inter-alia, possession of VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited was handed over to Al/ Mr.G.Srinivasan.

3. Subsequently, a second Tri-Party Agreement was executed on 08.07.2008 between A1/Mr.G. Srinivasan, petitioner and petitioner's family, and VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited, whereby, inter-alia, it is confirmed that petitioner and petitioner's family have transferred their shareholding in VMT Spinning Mills India Pvt to Al/Mr. G.Srinivasan for a consideration of Rs. 97.33 lakhs.

4. The petitioner's father Late Mr.Doraisamy lodged a complaint against Al/Mr.G. Srinivasan on 08.04.2009 (FIR No. 383 of 2009), and took back possession of the assets of VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited, from Al/Mr.G.Srinivasan in May, 2009. Mr.Doraisamy passed away on 10.09.2009. The petitioner in her statements under Section 50 of PMLA dated 23.03.2016 and 24.03.2016 admits knowledge of her father taking back possession of the company in May, 2009 and that she was aware of the criminal activities of Al/ Mr. G. Srinivasan since the end of 2008.

5. CBI received a complaint from SBI Global Factors Limited on 10.12.2010 and subsequently filed a charge sheet on 28.11.2011 which is the Schedule/Predicate Offence.

6. On 09.01.2012 yet another Tri-Party Agreement was executed between the petitioner & her family members, VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited, and a person named Mr.Durai. Whereby, inter-alia, land, building, and machinery of VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited were sold to Mr.Durai for Rs.5.14 crores of which Rs.2.50 crores was received as advance by the petitioner and her mother.

7. The Petitioner has sold the assets of VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited. Though she is a party to the first Tri- Party agreement dated 12.11.2007, and second Tri-Party agreement dated 08.07.2008, whereby the petitioner and her family members sold their entire shareholding in VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited to Al. The said fact has been admitted by the petitioner.

8. Subsequently, on 23.07.2014, Memorandum of Compromise was executed between VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited, Al and petitioner and petitioner's family. Whereby the first and second Tri-Party agreements dated 12.11.2007 and 08.07.2008 are cancelled, and petitioner and petitioner's family pay A1/Mr. G. Srinivasan a sum of Rs.2.65 crores.

9. Clause 7 of the Memorandum of Compromise states that Al is unable to hand over to the petitioner the Original share certificates relating to VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited since the same is under custody and possession of CBI and that the Petitioner is to seek issuance of duplicate share certificates from the company, on the basis of the Memorandum of Compromise and the orders to be passed by the Company Law Board.

10. Pertinently, the petitioner in her statement under Section 50 of PMLA, dated 24.03.2016 states that she does not remember handing over the share certificates to A1.

11. On 25.10.2017, the Registrar of Companies issues Form No. STK-7 whereby VMT Spinning Mills India Private Limited had been strike off from the register of companies, and the company stood dissolved for non filing of statutory returns.

12. However, the Petitioner continues to represent VMT Spinning Mills India Private