TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court upholds PMLA complaint, includes IPC Section 420</h1> <h3>Shri Anuraag Jain S/o. Mathanlal Jain, Smt. K. Manjula W/o. K. Kamalchand Jain Versus Directorate of Enforcement, The Assistant Director, Chennai Zonal Office-II</h3> Shri Anuraag Jain S/o. Mathanlal Jain, Smt. K. Manjula W/o. K. Kamalchand Jain Versus Directorate of Enforcement, The Assistant Director, Chennai Zonal ... Issues:1. Quashing of proceedings in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.2. Competency of the Assistant Director to file a complaint without special authorization.3. Inclusion of Section 420 IPC as a scheduled offence under the PMLA.4. Presence of the accused during trial proceedings.Analysis:1. The petition sought to quash proceedings in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The case involved allegations of granting huge loans leading to NPA status. The Enforcement Directorate filed a complaint against the accused for money laundering. Both sides agreed that the trial was ready to proceed.2. The first contention was regarding the competency of the Assistant Director to file the complaint without special authorization. The court referred to relevant sections of the PMLA and notifications by the Central Government. It was concluded that the Assistant Director was classified as an authority under the Act, hence no further authorization was necessary.3. The second issue raised was the non-inclusion of Section 420 IPC as a scheduled offence under the PMLA at the time of registration of the case by the CBI. The Enforcement Directorate registered the case after the inclusion of Section 420 IPC. A Supreme Court judgment highlighted that money laundering can be prosecuted irrespective of the date of the scheduled offence if the proceeds of crime are laundered after the PMLA came into force.4. The court addressed the presence of the accused during trial proceedings. The petitioners requested the absence of one accused due to being a housewife. The court allowed her absence for most hearings but specified her presence for certain proceedings. The court also outlined conditions for the accused who were not arrested or on bail.In conclusion, the petition was dismissed, and specific directions were given regarding the presence of the accused during trial proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
