Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
K.LAKSHMAN
Byappanahalli Prabhakar Rddy Kumar Babu – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
ORDER :
(K. LAKSHMAN, J.)
The present criminal petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter ‘ BNSS ’) to quash the criminal proceedings in S.C. No. 3/2021 in ECIR/09/HZO/2011 pending on the file of learned Principal Special Judge for Trial of CBI-cum-Special Court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 at Nampally, Hyderabad qua the Petitioners.
2. Heard Mr. D. Prakash Reddy, learned senior counsel representing Mr. SVS Chowdary, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. D. Narendar Naik, learned standing counsel appearing for the Respondent.
FACTUAL MATRIX:-
3. Vide common order dated 10.08.2011 in W.P.Nos.794 of 2011 and 6604 of 2011 erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh noted that there were large scale financial misdeeds and corruption involving the distribution of State largesse. Allegations were made against the then Chief Minister and his son that they accepted money in the form of investments in their companies in exchange for allotment of government projects to various businessmen. Therefore, basing on the said allegations, the Court ordered a CBI inquiry.
4. The CBI registered a case bearing RC No. 19 (A) / 2011-CBI / H
Money laundering proceedings can continue even if the predicate offence is quashed against one accused, as long as allegations and requisite material exist against others involved.
The existence of a scheduled offence is essential for sustaining PMLA proceedings; quashing of such offences leads to dismissal of related money laundering charges, but a firm may be prosecuted indep....
The offence of money laundering under the PMLA is a continuing offence, applicable irrespective of when the predicate offence occurred, and requires thorough judicial scrutiny.
Without a predicate offense, proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act cannot be sustained, as established by the Supreme Court.
Possession of proceeds of crime infers necessary knowledge for prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, regardless of whether the individual is charged in underlying predicate offenc....
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....
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 trial under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is independent of any pending trial for the predicate offence, as affirmed by the court.
Money laundering is a standalone offence under PMLA, independent of scheduled offences; involvement in proceeds of crime can lead to prosecution even if not charged with the underlying crime.
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
