9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MP.No.565 of 2024 in Crl.OP.No.916 of 2024 - - - PMLA - Money Laundering - Scheduled offences or not - attachment of properties - Court had quashed the entire complaint - HELD THAT:- Since the complaint itself is not maintainable, the respondent has no jurisdiction to attach the properties of the petitioners and therefore the order of attachment passed under Section 5(5) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 dated 30.09.2022 impugned in this writ petition, is liable to be quashed and hence, quashed. Petition allowed. - Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S.Ramesh And Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sunder Mohan For the Petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.208477/23 : Mr.Nithyesh Natarajan for Mr.Anirudh A Sriram For the Petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.916/24 : Mr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tes Pvt. Ltd. cheated Shri M.S Hameed through a criminal conspiracy and this fact i.e., the commission of scheduled offence [Section 120 B] is proved in the trial held in the predicate offence. 9. As stated earlier, the petitioner was convicted for the offence of 409 r/w 109 and 120B of the IPC. Therefore, the predicate offence alleged and proved is conspiracy to commit offence under Section 409 of the IPC which is not a scheduled offence. Therefore, even assuming that there are proceeds of crime, it cannot be said to be as a result of commission of a scheduled offence, which is a prerequisite to maintain a complaint under Section 3 of the PMLA. The above referred observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are squarely applicable to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hment order is also without jurisdiction. 4. The above would show that this Court had quashed the entire complaint in Spl.C.C.No.6 of 2023. It is needless to say that the complaint against the petitioners herein, also cannot be sustained. 5. WP No.1024 of 2023, has been filed for quashing of the following three orders:- (i) ECIR No.CEZO-I/39/2021 dated 31.03.2021 registered by the 1st respondent insofar as these petitioners are concerned; (ii) provisional attachment passed by the 1st respondent under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in Order No.11/2022 in ECIR No.CEZO-I/39/2021 dated 30.9.2022 insofar as the Schedule-A Schedule-B, C properties are concerned; and (iii) the complaint (OC) No.1828 of 2022 in PAO No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 29.01.2024, at the instance of the petitioners' counsel, the matter is listed today under the caption For Being Mentioned . 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that pending ECIR Proceedings No.CEZO-I/39/2021 dated 31.03.2021, which was quashed by us, certain movable properties were seized by the respondents. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks for clarification with regard to the return of movable properties. 3. Learned Special Public Prosecutor (ED) appearing for the respondent submits that in view of the final orders being passed, wherein, the proceedings as well as the complaint have been quashed, the petitioners would be entitled for the movables. 4. In view of the above submission, Paragra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
