9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the PC Act - there is no shred of material to show that Raveendranatha Reddy, had, in any manner, directly or indirectly, assisted T.D.Naidu in projecting the proceeds of crime (viz., loan amount that was disbursed by Andhra Bank to T.D.Naidu) as untainted money for him to be prosecuted under Sections 3 and 4 of the PML Act. It is true that this Court has dismissed the quash petition of the coaccused in this case, but, the complaint disclosed specific overt acts against Prabavathy (A2), Tataji (A3), Sonia (A4) and Varadharajan (A5) as to how they had assisted T.D.Naidu in projecting the proceeds of crime as untainted property. However, the case of Raveendranatha Reddy stands on a different footing, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rming Asset (NPA). 2.2 Consequently, on a written complaint given by the General Manager of the Andhra Bank, Chennai, the Central Bureau of Investigation (for brevity the CBI ) registered a case in RC-3(E)/2012 on 20.03.2012 for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w 420, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for brevity the PC Act ). 2.3 After completing the investigation, the CBI filed a charge sheet in C.C.No.48 of 2013 in the Court of the XI Additional Sessions Judge, (Special Court for CBI Cases), Chennai, against three accused viz., T.D.Naidu (A1), R.Varadarajan (A2) and N.Raveendranatha Reddy (A3). 2.4 Since the case registered by the CBI disclosed an offence under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ricated documents in the capacity of the then Branch Manager and Branch Head, Andhra Bank, Anna Nagar Branch, as submitted by Shri T.D.Naidu (A-1 herein), and has actually involved himself and knowingly assisted with Shri T.D.Naidu in the process of defrauding the bank and in the activity connected with the proceeds of the crime. Thus, it is very well confirmed that Shri N.Raveendranathareddy (A-6 herein) has indirectly involved and knowingly is a party in the offence of money laundering. Therefore, Shri N.Raveendranathareddy (A-6 herein) has been guilty of offence of money laundering under Section 2(1)(p) r/w Section 3 of the PMLA, 2002. 6. Apart from the above allegation, there is no other allegation in the complaint as against Rave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment as the predicate offence). Thus, whosoever is involved as aforesaid, in a process or activity connected with proceeds of crime as defined, which would include concealing, possessing, acquiring or using such property, would be guilty of the offence, provided such persons also project or claim such property as untainted property. Section 3, therefore, contains all the aforesaid ingredients, and before somebody can be adjudged as guilty under the said provision, the said person must not only be involved in any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime, but must also project or claim it as being untainted property. (emphasis supplied) 8. In this case, Raveendranatha Reddy, who was the Branch Manager of Andhra Bank, app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
