9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 905X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at were allotted to her, as they have been surrendered and cancellation of allotment has happened. Therefore, there is no laundering in the case at hand. In the case at hand, the alleged proceeds of crime are referable to allotment of sites. The coordinate bench in the case of NATESHA [2025 (2) TMI 216 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] holds in two of its paragraphs that allotment of sites cannot become proceeds of crime. In the light of the findings rendered by the coordinate Bench, as also different High Courts interpreting what would be proceeds of crime and whom would be guilty of proceeds of crime, the case at hand neither projects the petitioner being in possession, enjoyment and usage of proceeds of crime. The Enforcement Directorate has filed detailed objections appending to it proceedings of search, seizure and attachment of property. While so doing, it has relied on those very judgments which have all been considered by the coordinate Bench as quoted. A communication from the Enforcement Directorate to the Additional Director General of Police, Lokayukta dated 30-11-2024 is produced as Annexure-R1. The allegations against the petitioner, and all other accused are verbatim simila ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of the State of Karnataka. Complaints come to be registered before the competent Court invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., against five accused. Accused No.1 was depicted to be the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka, accused No.2 is the present petitioner and three other accused. Approval as obtaining under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was sought from the hands of the Governor to investigate into the alleged crime against the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka. The Governor, in terms of his order, grants approval as obtaining under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, permitting investigation into the allegations against the Chief Minister and his family. The said grant of approval comes to be challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.22356 of 2024. This Court by its order dated 24-09-2024 negatives the said challenge and affirms grant of approval by the Governor to investigate into the allegations. 3. Pursuant to the dismissal of the challenge as afore-noticed, the concerned Court directs registration of a First Information Report ('FIR') to investigate into the offence as obtaining under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. The inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not even in possession of the alleged proceeds of crime. It is his submission that the land belonging to the petitioner, which was gifted by accused No. 3 in the year 2005, is acquired by MUDA. Against the said acquisition, the petitioner becomes entitled in terms of law for grant of adequate compensation. She was compensated by allotment of 14 sites. This becomes the subject matter of huge hue and cry and the Governor grants approval to investigate into the offence. The sites are surrendered. The petitioner is no longer in possession, enjoyment and usage of the said sites. Therefore, there cannot be an offence under Section 3 of the Act is what is submitted by the learned senior counsel. It is his further submission that the Enforcement Directorate should await the decision in the predicate offence to come to conclude that there is prima facie case of money laundering and there cannot be a parallel investigation. In all, the crux of the submission is that the petitioner is neither in possession, enjoyment or usage of the alleged proceeds of crime. He would submit that it is not even proceeds of crime, as it was compensation granted in terms of law by a statutory authority agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record. Pursuant to the aforesaid registration of crime which happens on 27-09-2024 two subsequent developments emerge. The Enforcement Directorate registers an ECIR in ECIR F.No. BGZO/25/2024. The ECIR comes to be registered on 01-10-2024. A little walk in the history of the reason and registration of predicate offence in Crime No. 11 of 2024 and consequent registration of impugned ECIR is necessary to be noticed. The petitioner, as observed hereinabove, is the wife of the present Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka. Accused No. 3, her brother acquires certain lands which would come within the precincts of MUDA in the year 2004, having purchased them from accused No. 4 one Devaraju. Six years after the purchase, accused No. 3, the brother-in-law of the Chief Minister gifts the property to the present petitioner, his sister. The gift deed is in subsistence. MUDA is said to have acquired the property of 3 acres and 16 guntas which belonged to the petitioner. 11. Against the said acquisition, the petitioner registers a claim before MUDA for grant of compensation. MUDA assessed the compensation and allots 14 sites in lieu of compensation for the act of acquisition of land of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely borne by the First Party SCHEDULE PROPERTY All that piece and parcel of residential site bearing No. 25 formed in Vijayanagar 3rd Stage C Block Layout, Mysuru measuring East to West 24.00 Meters North to South 15.00 Meters totally measuring 360.00 Square Meters and bounded on the East by : Road West by : Site No. 89 North by : Site No. 26 South by : Site No. 24" Pursuant to the aforesaid deed of cancellation comes about the order dated 01-10-2024. The order accepting the surrender of the sites reads as follows: In terms of the afore-quoted deed of cancellation and acceptance of the same by the order with the surrender of sites, the allotment or the proceeds of allotment by way of its value was no longer with the petitioner. Yet another instance happened on the same day i.e., 01-10-2024. The Enforcement Directorate registers Enforcement Case Information Report, the impugned ECIR on the strength of the petitioner being accused No.2 in the predicate offence i.e., Crime No. 11 of 2024. The Directorate seeks to conduct investigation and later issued summons to the petitioner invoking power under Section 50 of the Act to enquire into the issue of money laundering agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efined in Section 2 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 (40 of 1982); (ha) "client" means a person who is engaged in a financial transaction or activity with a reporting entity and includes a person on whose behalf the person who engaged in the transaction or activity, is acting;] (i) "co-operative bank" shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (dd) of Section 2 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961); (ia) "corresponding law" means any law of any foreign country corresponding to any of the provisions of this Act or dealing with offences in that country corresponding to any of the scheduled offences; (ib) "dealer" has the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956);] (j) "Deputy Director" means a Deputy Director appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 49; (k) "Director" or "Additional Director" or "Joint Director" means a Director or Additional Director or Joint Director, as the case may be, appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 49; (l) "financial institution" means a financial institution as defined in clause (c) of Section 45-I of the Reserve Bank of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t thereof from India to a place outside India. Explanation.-Nothing contained in this clause shall adversely affect any investigation, enquiry, trial or proceeding before any authority in respect of the offences specified in Part A or Part B of the Schedule to the Act before the commencement of the Prevention of Money-Laundering (Amendment) Act, 2009; (rb) "payment system" means a system that enables payment to be effected between a payer and a beneficiary, involving clearing, payment or settlement service or all of them. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause, "payment system" includes the systems enabling credit card operations, debit card operations, smart card operations, money transfer operations or similar operations; (rc) "payment system operator" means a person who operates a payment system and such person includes his overseas principal. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause, "overseas principal" means,- (A) in the case of a person, being an individual, such individual residing outside India, who owns or controls or manages, directly or indirectly, the activities or functions of payment system in India; (B) in the case of a Hindu undivided family ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 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; Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence; (v) "property" means any property or assets of every description, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and includes deeds and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets, wherever located; Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the term "property" includes property of any kind used in the commission of an offence under this Act or any of the scheduled offences; (va) "real estate agent" means a real estate agent as defined in clause (88) of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994);] (w) "records" include the records maintained in the form of books or stored in a computer or such other form as may be presc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever. ... ... ... ... 5. Attachment of property involved in money-laundering.-(1) Where the Director or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Director authorised by the Director for the purposes of this section, has reason to believe (the reason for such belief to be recorded in writing), on the basis of material in his possession, that- (a) any person is in possession of any proceeds of crime; and (b) such proceeds of crime are likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceedings relating to confiscation of such proceeds of crime under this Chapter, he may, by order in writing, provisionally attach such property for a period not exceeding one hundred and eighty days from the date of the order, in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that no such order of attachment shall be made unless, in relation to the scheduled offence, a report has been forwarded to a Magistrate under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or a complai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plaint stating the facts of such attachment before the Adjudicating Authority. ... ... 50. Powers of authorities regarding summons, production of documents and to give evidence, etc.-(1) The Director shall, for the purposes of Section 13, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely:- (a) discovery and inspection; (b) enforcing the attendance of any person, including any officer of a [reporting entity], and examining him on oath; (c) compelling the production of records; (d) receiving evidence on affidavits; (e) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses and documents; and (f) any other matter which may be prescribed. (2) The Director, Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Director or Assistant Director shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary whether to give evidence or to produce any records during the course of any investigation or proceeding under this Act. (3) All the persons so summoned shall be bound to attend in person or through authorised agents, as such officer may direct, and shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... offence under the general law cannot be regarded as proceeds of crime. There may be cases where the property involved in the commission of scheduled offence attached by the investigating agency dealing with that offence, cannot be wholly or partly regarded as proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (u) of the 2002 Act - so long as the whole or some portion of the property has been derived or obtained by any person "as a result of" criminal activity relating to the stated scheduled offence. To be proceeds of crime, therefore, the property must be derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, "as a result of" criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. To put it differently, the vehicle used in commission of scheduled offence may be attached as property in the case (crime) concerned, it may still not be proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (u) of the 2002 Act. Similarly, possession of unaccounted property acquired by legal means may be actionable for tax violation and yet, will not be regarded as proceeds of crime unless the tax legislation concerned prescribes such violation as an offence and such offence is included in the Schedule to the 2002 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation would be necessary to uphold the purposes and objects for enactment of the 2002 Act. 109. Tersely put, it is only such property which is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence that can be regarded as proceeds of crime. The authorities under the 2002 Act cannot resort to action against any person for money laundering on an assumption that the property recovered by them must be proceeds of crime and that a scheduled offence has been committed, unless the same is registered with the jurisdictional police or pending inquiry by way of complaint before the competent forum. For, the expression "derived or obtained" is indicative of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence already accomplished. Similarly, in the event the person named in the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence is finally absolved by a court of competent jurisdiction owing to an order of discharge, acquittal or because of quashing of the criminal case (scheduled offence) against him/her, there can be no action for money laundering against such a person or person claiming through him in relation to the property linked to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ply clear that the offence of money laundering is an independent offence regarding the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime which had been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to or in relation to a scheduled offence. The process or activity can be in any form - be it one of concealment, possession, acquisition, use of proceeds of crime as much as projecting it as untainted property or claiming it to be so. Thus, involvement in any one of such process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime would constitute offence of money laundering. This offence otherwise has nothing to do with the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence - except the proceeds of crime derived or obtained as a result of that crime. 135. Needless to mention that such process or activity can be indulged in only after the property is derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity (a scheduled offence). It would be an offence of money laundering to indulge in or to assist or being party to the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime; and such process or activity in a given fact situation may be a continuing offence, irrespective ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xist proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (u) of the 2002 Act and further it is involved in any process or activity. Not even in a case of existence of undisclosed income and irrespective of its volume, the definition of "proceeds of crime" under Section 2 (1) (u) will get attracted, unless the property has been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. 151. It is possible that in a given case after the discovery of huge volume of undisclosed property, the authorised officer may be advised to send information to the jurisdictional police [under Section 66 (2) of the 2002 Act] for registration of a scheduled offence contemporaneously, including for further investigation in a pending case, if any. On receipt of such information, the jurisdictional police would be obliged to register the case by way of FIR if it is a cognizable offence or as a non-cognizable offence (NC case), as the case may be. If the offence so reported is a scheduled offence, only in that eventuality, the property recovered by the authorised officer would partake the colour of proceeds of crime under Section 2 (1) (u) of the 2002 Act, enabling him to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to prevent money laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from such money laundering. At paragraph 99 the Apex Court considers Section 2 (1) (p) which deals with money laundering and Section 2 (1) (u) which defines proceeds of crime. The Apex Court then travels to Section 3 and considers what could be the process and activity of money laundering. The Apex court considers what is proceeds of crime in paragraph 106 and what would mean the purport of Section 2 (1) (u). At paragraph 136 the Apex Court observes that the rudimentary understanding of money laundering is that there has to be three generally accepted stages i.e., placement; layering; integration. Placement would be the funds from direct association of the crime; layering would disguising the trail to foil pursuit and integration would be making the money available to the criminal from what seem to be legitimate sources. Therefore, the Apex Court hold that making tainted money into untainted money or even its projection would amount to money laundering. 14. Several High Courts have considered the purport of the Act and the afore-quoted provisions both before and after the judgement of the Apex Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OR, DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT 2024 SCC OnLine Mad.5418, wherein it is held as follows: ".... .... .... 29. 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 is relevant to consider the scope of Section 3 which provides offence of money laundering. 30. Section 3 stipulates that "whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or using and projecting it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money laundering". 31. The expression "money laundering", ordinarily, means the process or activity of placement, layering and finally integrating the tainted property in the formal economy of the country. However, Section 3 has a wider reach. The offence, as defined, captures every ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a person under the PMLA. Unless contrary is proved, presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering. Therefore, the burden of proof lies on the affected person, who in turn has to prove his innocence during the course of trial. Adjudication of those materials placed by the petitioners would be unnecessary for this Court, while dealing with the discharge petitions." (Emphasis supplied) The Division Bench holds whoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assist a party for concealment, possession, acquisition and using, would be guilty of possessing proceeds of crime. The Division Bench therein holds that the person had abetted the commission of crime. Therefore, the order which declined to discharge the accused therein was affirmed. 15. The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir in the case of HILAL AHMAD MIR & ORS. V DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT DY. CRM(M) No. 484/2024, decided on 03.01.2025, elaborates on this issue and holds as follows: ".... .... .... 10. Before proceeding further in the matter, a reference to Section 2 (1) (p), 2 (1) (u), Section 3 and Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 would be also relevant, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds of crime" involved in money-laundering relates to any offence specified under paragraph 2 of Part A of the Schedule, the provisions of this section shall have effect as if for the words "which may extend to seven years", the words "which may extend to ten years" had been substituted." What emanates from the aforesaid provisions is that in order to constitute an offence of money-laundering as defined under Section 3 (Supra) , the most important thing is that there must be an activity connected with the "proceeds of crime", which proceeds of crime in terms of the aforesaid definition would mean 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. Thus, in order to constitute an offence under Section 3 of PMLA, Section 2 (1) (u) is to be read together with Section 3 of PMLA to find out whether the ingredients of the offence of money-laundering are made out or not. When read so, the offence of money-laundering can said to have been committed by fulfilment of following conditions:- i. Scheduled offence must have been committed; ii. Commission of scheduled offen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p in or initiate any prosecution. 284. In other words, the Authority under the 2002 Act, is to prosecute a person for offence of money-laundering only if it has reason to believe, which is required to be recorded in writing that the person is in possession of ""proceeds of crime"". Only if that belief is further supported by tangible and credible evidence indicative of involvement of the person concerned in any process or activity connected with the "proceeds of crime", action under the Act can be taken forward for attachment and confiscation of "proceeds of crime" and until vesting thereof in the Central Government, such process initiated would be a standalone process." What emanates from the above position of law is that the Apex Court, inter alia, has held that in absence of "proceeds of crime", the Authority under PMLA have no jurisdiction to proceed. 16. Further perusal of the record tends to show and as has been noticed in the preceding paras, admittedly no money was transferred to the accounts of the petitioners herein, therefore, there was no occasion for the petitioners herein to indulge in any activity associated with the so called "proceeds of crime" as the money t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the act of the petitioners herein of having fraudulently secured loan for development and establishment of satellite township by submitting false documents, at the most makes out a case for forgery or Bank fraud." (Emphasis supplied) The judicial interpretation of Section 2 (1) (u) and 3 of the Act is that the person should be in possession, enjoyment and usage of the property, which is alleged to be proceeds of crime projecting it to be untainted money. 16. The challenge in the case at hand, apart from the challenge to the ECIR is to the summons issued under Section 50 of the Act quoted supra. Submissions are made by the learned Additional Solicitor General taking this Court through several judgments of the Apex Court and that of other Courts as to whether summons can be challenged or otherwise. The contention of the learned Additional Solicitor General as noted hereinabove is that, summons cannot be challenged and there is no precedent holding that issuance of summons can be challenged and it is to be quashed. All these submissions are the ones considered by the coordinate Bench, in which the learned Additional Solicitor General himself has appeared and had projected identica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndirectly, 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; Explanation.- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence". 9.3. Section 3 of PMLA, 2002 defines the Offence of money-laundering.- "Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering. Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that,- (i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the investigation remains tied to the twin objectives of the PMLA: * Combating money laundering as a standalone offence. * Ensuring that the property associated with criminal activities is identified, confiscated, or attached to prevent misuse in the financial system. .... .... .... ISSUE NO. 3 35. The petitioner herein further challenges the repeated issuance of summons under Section 50 of the PMLA, arguing that these summons are vague because they do not specify whether the petitioner is being treated as an accused or a witness. This, according to the petitioner, violates the constitutional protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. 36. Section 50 of PMLA deals with Powers of authorities regarding summons, production of documents and to give evidence, etc. and the relevant portions thereof, reads thus - "Section 50. - ... (2) The Director, Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Director or Assistant Director shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary whether to give evidence or to produce any records during the course of any investigation or proceeding under this Act. (3) All the pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l to the criminal justice system, and that a person cannot be repeatedly summoned without probable cause for convenience of the prosecution. 41. In response, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, contended that Section 50 of the Act empowered the authorized officers to summon any person necessary to give necessary evidence or produce any record. In support of the same, the learned ASG drew the attention of the Court to various precedents, including the case of Director General of Income Tax (Investigation) v. Spacewood Furnishers Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 12 SCC 179, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court stated that while the reasons for search and seizure conducted under Income Tax Act, 1961 must be recorded, they do not need to be communicated to the person at that time. The Court also emphasized that judicial review cannot question the adequacy of the reasons for search, but only their relevance, and that any review of the sufficiency of the reasons or the authenticity of the information is not permissible. Therefore, the ASG argued that this Court cannot review the adequacy of the reasons for the search conducted under Section 17 and the issuance of summons under Section 50 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner had alleged that officers conducting a search at the residence of his ex-wife had threatened arrest unless the petitioner complied with their demands. The Court held that the petitioner should have pursued the remedy under law only when any positive action was taken to his prejudice. 44.1. Therefore, the learned ASG, relying on the above, argued that the petitioner herein cannot seek a similar relief under Article 226 of the Constitution, as no action prejudicial to the petitioner has yet been taken. The summons issued under Section 50 of the PMLA were lawful and aimed at gathering evidence and records for the investigation under the Act. Therefore, the petition should be dismissed as premature. 45. The High Court of Kerala in C M Raveendran v. Union of India (2020) SCC OnLine Ker 7335 reaffirmed the above ratio, stating that no cause of action arises merely because a person is called upon to state the truth or make a statement and produce documents. The Court further held that any apprehension of being coerced into giving a statement based on repeated issuance of summons is not a valid ground to seek constitutional relief under Article 226. 46. In the case of Union of In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to give evidence or produce records for investigation. Those summoned are required to comply with the same. 51. In Talib Hassan Darvesh v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2024) SCC OnLine Del 1811, the Delhi High Court rejected a challenge to summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the grounds that the summons were vague. The petitioner had argued that the summons did not specify their status as a witness or suspect and did not mention the documents required. The Court held that the ED could issue summons without specifying the exact documents, as they are authorized to investigate and issue summons under PMLA. It further ruled that protection from summons cannot be granted unless the petitioner is absolved in the predicate offence through discharge, acquittal, or quashing, in line with the statutory rigours of Section 45 of PMLA. 52. In Moloy Ghatak v. Directorate of Enforcement (2023) SCC OnLine 7443, the Delhi High Court addressed a challenge to repeated summons issued to a petitioner who was not yet an accused in the predicate offence. The Court found the petitioner's request to quash the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) prematurely, because the ECIR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accused. In the case at hand, the petitioner is an accused in the predicate offence i.e., Crime No. 11 of 2024. Notwithstanding the petitioner being an accused in the predicate offence, whether ingredients of Section 3 are met in the case at hand for proceeding further is what is required to be noticed. 17. As observed hereinabove, Section 3 has certain ingredients to be present. It should be concealment, possession, acquisition and usage of property which is allegedly proceeds of crime. What is proceeds of crime in the case at hand is sites granted in lieu of compensation. The compensation is granted under respective enactments. Whether the petitioner or other accused are guilty of those offences is being investigated into by the Lokayukta Police pursuant to registration of a crime in Crime No. 11 of 2024. The facts as on the date of registration of ECIR is that the petitioner is not in possession, enjoyment and usage of sites that were allotted to her, as they have been surrendered and cancellation of allotment has happened. Therefore, there is no laundering in the case at hand. 18. In the case at hand, the alleged proceeds of crime are referable to allotment of sites. The coor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted supra. A communication from the Enforcement Directorate to the Additional Director General of Police, Lokayukta dated 30-11-2024 is produced as Annexure-R1. The allegations against the petitioner, and all other accused are verbatim similar to what is alleged in the complaint registered before the concerned Court which has become a crime in Crime No. 11 of 2024. 20. To a pointed query, the learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that it is not only the petitioner whom the Enforcement Directorate is concerned, but it is examining a larger picture; large illegalities or money laundering against several persons. Those proceedings are also appended as Annexure-R2 where it makes a provisional attachment under sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Act. The statements of several persons are recorded and illegalities in allotment to several other persons form the fulcrum of attachment order. To quote, illegal allotment to one Ravi Kumar; illegal allotment to one Abdul Wahid and illegal allotments to several other persons. There is nothing against the petitioner or other accused in Crime No. 11 of 2024 recorded with evidence of statements that the sites that were allotted to the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
