Court directs closure of PMLA proceedings after predicate offence, citing legal precedents.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the closure of proceedings under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act (PMLA) following the closure of the predicate offence. The court emphasized that PMLA proceedings cannot continue if the predicate offence has been closed, citing precedents and the principles established in the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case. The Enforcement Directorate retains the right to revive the PMLA proceedings if further action is taken on the predicate offence, in line with the decision in Emta Coal's case. No costs were awarded in this disposition.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the proceedings under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) can continue after the closure of the predicate offence.
2. Interpretation and application of the principles laid down in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case.

Summary of Judgment:

Issue 1: Continuation of PMLA Proceedings Post Predicate Offence Closure
The petitioner sought a direction to close proceedings against them under the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) linked to an FIR which had been closed by the jurisdictional Metropolitan Magistrate Court. The petitioner argued that, according to the Supreme Court's ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, authorities under PMLA cannot prosecute if the predicate offence has been closed. The court noted the closure of the predicate offence and its finality, emphasizing that there can be no money laundering offence without an active predicate offence. This was supported by precedents such as S. Jagathrakshakan and Harish Fabiani cases, which reiterated that PMLA proceedings cannot survive the closure of the predicate offence.

Issue 2: Application of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Principles
The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, particularly paragraph 467(v)(d), which states that money laundering charges cannot proceed if the predicate offence is closed or the accused is acquitted. The court also cited relevant case laws, including Emta Coal, where similar issues were addressed, and the Supreme Court's order affirmed that PMLA proceedings cannot continue post-closure of the predicate offence unless further action is taken on the predicate offence.

Final Order:
The court disposed of the writ petition, ruling in favor of the petitioner and directing the closure of PMLA proceedings. However, it included a caveat that if any further action is taken regarding the predicate offence, the Enforcement Directorate retains the right to revive the proceedings under PMLA. This decision aligns with the Supreme Court's stance in Emta Coal's case. There was no order as to costs.

---