9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have categorically told about it. Not only Dr. Tarun Rao but other witnesses have also stated about the role of the petitioners. It is not a case of mere presence of the petitioners, which is the basis of their implication. It is the case of assisting someone to acquire proceeds of crime. The role assigned to the petitioners is that they assisted someone to acquire and conceal the proceeds of crime. It definitely makes out a prima facie case under Section 4 of the Act against the petitioners. A detailed examination or mini-trial at this stage, is not expected of. This Court is of the view that prima facie offence is made out against the petitioners. There is no reason to make any interference in the petitions. Accordingly, both the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken. Thereafter, the respondent filed a complaint against the petitioners and others under Section 3 read with 4 of the Act. It is the basis of the case, in which on 08.02.2021, cognizance has been taken against the petitioners and others and they have been summoned to answer accusations under Section 4 of the Act. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Surjeet Singh would submit that no, prima facie, case is made out against the petitioner Surjeet Singh. He would submit that money was not deposited in the account of Surjeet Singh; he did not receive any money; he was not paid any kind of commission; the petitioner Surjeet Singh did not impersonate; he was merely present with one of the co-accused. It is argued that mere presence cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely:- (a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever. 9. Section 4 of the Act provides punishment for money laundering. 10. A bare reading of Section 3 of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statement that he met the complainants at Hotel. Sandeep Gupta in connivance with other accused persons has generated huge funds to the tune of Rs. 1.29 Cr. Through criminal activity related to the scheduled offence. He projected himself as the PA to the VC of HIHT Medical College, Jolly Grant, Dehradun. He used to get commission for the said work. These funds are nothing but proceeds of crime generated through criminal activity related to the scheduled offence. Thus, Sandeep Gupta is one of the main architects involved in cheating the candidates by falsely impersonating himself as the PA to the VC of HIHT Medical College, Jolly Grant, Dehradun and giving false assurance of their admission in Medical PG Course in HIHT/SRHU in lieu of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dulged or knowingly involved in process/activities of possession, acquisition; use/concealment of the POC hence appears to have committed offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which is punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. 12. The respondent has also filed the statements of one of the victims Dr. Tarun Rao. He has also stated about the role of both the petitioners. It is as hereunder:- Sandeep Gupta:- He is the one whom I met in HIHT medical college cancer institute along with Rajiv Rana, Sukhjeet Singh and Ankush Sagar Khatri. He introduced himself as academic co ordinator in HIHT medical college and spoke to me about the various PG seats a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18.03.2015. On that date, according to Dr. Tarun Rao, petitioner Surjeet Singh along with Rajeev Rana met him where he had paid some money to Rajeev Rana. The part of the statement is as follows:- On the next day i.e. 18.03.2015 I alongwith Rajeev Rana and Surjeet Singh went to Nearby SBI Bank and I have done a NEFT transaction of Rs. 2 Lakhs in HDFC Bank (A/c 16681930006649), Anand Vihar New Delhi of Rajeev Rana. After that I have withdrawn Rs. 40 thousand from my SBI account ATM. There after I alongwith both of them went to SBI main Branch Dehradun and have withdrawn Rs. 40 thousand Green Channel Counter and Rs. 50 thousand through self cheque. After that I along with Rajeev Rana and Surjeet Singh went to Madhuban Hotel and handed ove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
