9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1494X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore the Principal Special Court for CBI Cases in C.C.No.03/2022 seeking relief to discharge the accused from the offence of Money Laundering as defined under Section 3 and punishable under Section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (hereinafter referred to as 'PMLA'). 3. The Special Court rejected the petition, which resulted in institution of the present criminal revision petition. 4. Mr.Nithyaesh Natraj, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the predicate offence allegedly committed by the petitioner was under Section 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He was prosecuted for the offence for possessing disproportionate wealth. The disproportionate wealth in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied on para.270 of Vijay Madanlal case reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 929. The three Judges bench of the Apex Court in unequivocal terms reiterated that such actions in the absence of establishing proceeds of crime are untenable. Therefore, the Trial Court has not considered these aspects while dealing with the discharge petition. Thus, the revision petition is to be allowed. 8. Mr.P.Sidharthan, the learned Special Public Prosecutor would strenuously oppose by stating that the trial court has elaborately considered all these grounds. Prevention of Corruption Act and invocation of PMLA by the respondent cannot be compared with. The predicate offences though under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the petitioner was convicted, the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Prevention of Corruption Act, the proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2(1) (u) continued to be under the possession of the petitioner as on the date of registration of ECIR on 18.05.2017. Therefore, on the date of registration of case under PMLA, the proceeds of crime existed. Thus, there is no violation of the provisions of PMLA. 11. With reference to the arguments, Section 2(1) (u) defines "proceeds of crime means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside the country then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad." Thus, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 016, the disproportionate wealth accumulated continued to be with the possession of the petitioner and that provided cause for the Enforcement Directorate to institute action under PMLA. 14. The scope of PMLA is independent and cannot be compared with the dealing of offences under other enactments including Prevention of Corruption Act. The very purpose and object of PMLA is to deal with economic offences. Therefore, the provisions are stand alone and the Enforcement Directorate is conferred with the powers to prosecute the persons under Section 3 of the PMLA. 15. In view of the said fact, the principles of double jeopardy has no application. The other grounds raised by the petitioner are connected with the merits of the case. Section 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
