The court ruled that shareholders can be prosecuted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act if sufficient evidence of their involvement in money laundering activities exists, irrespective of direct participation in corporate decisions.

ORDER :

S.M. Subramaniam J.

Under assail is the judgement dated 13th October, 2023 in Crl.M.P.No.6422 of 2022 in Spl.C.C.No.2 of 2021.

2. The petitioner is Accused No.16 and she filed a petition under Section 227 of Criminal Procedure Code for discharge. Since the petition has been dismissed, the present Criminal Revision Case came to be instituted.

3. The petitioner is the then wife of Mr.C.Sivasankaran. The facts of the case are that the company, by name M/s Win Wind Oy, Finland (WWO) was sanctioned loan by M/s IDBI Bank, DIFC Branch, Dubai, for financial assistance of EURO 52 Million - (INR equivalent to 322.40 crores) towards Working Capital Facility, Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) and Loan Equivalent Ratio (LER). Due to lack of business, the company could not carry on the business and eventually ended up only accumulating losses. Later, WWO applied for Voluntary Bankruptcy and approached the Court of Finland who appointed Bankruptcy Estate Administrator (BEA) on 03.10.2013 for liquidation of assets.

4. After that, senior officials of IDBI Bank suggested to grant loan to M/s Axcel Sunshine Limited (M/s.ASL) based in the British Virgin Islands, for non-productive purpose to a tune of 83 Million USD to use the same for repaying the loan of M/s WWO and other associate companies of Siva Groups. Accordingly, the IDBI, DIFC Branch, Dubai disbursed a loan to the tune of 67 Million USD to M/s Axcel Sunshine Limited on 05.03.2014. The loans disbursed had not been utilised for the purpose for which it was availed from the IDBI Bank. Thus, the petitioners have involved in the process and activity of placement layering an integration of the proceeds of crime.

5. The petitioner sates that she was no way connected with the first loan disbursed to WWO Finland or the second loan disbursed to M/s.ASL, BV Island by IDBI Bank. As a shareholder of SIHL, the petitioner has neither given any consent, nor signed any resolution passed by SIHL to borrow money from IDBI Bank or to offer collateral security for loan.

6. In the meantime, CBI, BS & FC registered FIR No.09 dated 13.04.2018 under Section 120 B r/w Sections 409, 420 of IPC, r/w Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Since the case registered by the CBI disclosed an offence under Section 120B r/w 420 of IPC, r/w Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which is a schedule offence under Section 2(1)(y) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (herein after referred as PMLA), the respondent had registered a case in ECIDR/CEZO/1/10/2018 on 01.05.2018 for further investigation. The petitioner was not arraigned as an accused, either in the FIR or in the ECIR. Further she was not arraigned as accused in the final report filed by the CBI for the offence's under Sections 120(B) and 420 of IPC before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on 24.12.2022 in C.C.No.554 of 2023.

7. On completion of investigation, the respondent issued the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) No. 01/2019 dated 31.01.2009 and attached the immovable properties of the companies in terms of Section 5(1) of PMLA. The petitioner states that no movable or immovabl