9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (12) TMI 610 - HC - Money LaunderingPetition instituted to grant leave to the petitioner herein to prefer an appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondents/accused under PMLA, 2002 - HELD THAT - Undoubtedly, right of appeal against the order of acquittal by the prosecution is restricted, as the accused had the benefit of acquittal on the ground that charge against him had not been proved before the Trial Court. However, when the prosecution was not able to point out clinching ground or error resulting in miscarriage of justice or an erroneous conclusion, then the High Court would not hesitate to grant leave to the prosecution to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal. Admissibility of ground to grant leave depends on the facts of each case. Complete justice to the parties being the objective, the prosecution in the event of raising grounds to the satisfaction of the Court, then they are entitled to secure leave from the Court to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal. In the present case, the prosecution is able to establish that vital documents relied on by the Enforcement Directorate to prove the offence of money laundering has been treated as an inadmissible evidence, merely on the ground that the statements taken from the bank computer has not been certified nor original was filed. Admittedly, the said document Ex.P3, Forensic Audit Report was subsequently certified by the bank officials and it was produced before the Trial Court. But the Trial Court has not taken into consideration and formed an opinion that the bank statements are wholly inadmissible, which resulted in an order of acquittal - there are no hesitation in forming an opinion that the petitioner in present case is entitled to prefer an appeal against the order of acquittal. Consequently, leave is granted to the petitioner to file an Appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondents by judgment passed by the Principal Sessions at Chennai/Special Court under PMLA - Thus, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.
Issues:
Granting leave to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondents/accused in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Detailed Analysis: The case involved a complaint lodged by the State Bank of India (SBI) leading to the registration of an FIR by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against a company and its Promoter-Director for alleged diversion of working capital credit facilities, resulting in a substantial loss to banks. The Enforcement Directorate initiated a case under PMLA, conducted an investigation, and filed a complaint before the Special Court for PMLA in Chennai. The accused were alleged to have laundered loan funds, diverted crime proceeds, and caused significant losses to the banks. The Special Court, after trial, acquitted all the accused (Para 2-6). The petitioner, the Enforcement Directorate, filed a Criminal Appeal against the order of acquittal, arguing that the burden of proof on the accused was not discharged under PMLA. The petitioner contended that certain crucial documents were not considered by the Special Court, including a Forensic Audit Report, which the Court deemed inadmissible. The petitioner highlighted that the report was subsequently certified by bank officials, making it admissible evidence (Para 8-9). The respondents' counsel opposed the appeal, arguing that the accused were not connected to money laundering and that the Forensic Audit Report was inadmissible as it was neither original nor a certified copy. The Trial Court's decision to acquit the accused was supported based on the inadmissibility of the report. The counsel emphasized that subsequent certification by bank officials did not validate the evidence (Para 10-11). The judgment referenced legal principles from previous cases, emphasizing the mandatory nature of Section 65-B of the Evidence Act for electronic records. The Court also considered the criteria for granting leave to appeal against an order of acquittal, highlighting the need for strong and compelling reasons and the importance of economic offenses being handled with a different approach. The Court noted that PMLA is a special enactment with unique procedures to protect the country's economic interests (Para 12-14). Ultimately, the Court granted leave to the petitioner to file an Appeal against the order of acquittal, citing the Trial Court's failure to consider the subsequently certified Forensic Audit Report as a vital document. The Court found that the petitioner had grounds to appeal based on the misinterpretation of the admissibility of evidence, leading to the acquittal of the respondents (Para 15-16). In conclusion, the Criminal Original Petition was allowed, and the Registry was directed to number the Criminal Appeal for admission, enabling the petitioner to challenge the order of acquittal in the higher court (Para 17-18).
|
