Money laundering prosecution may proceed without completed predicate trial where materials show prima facie nexus with proceeds of crime.

Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act creates an independent offence covering concealment, possession, acquisition, use, projecting, or claiming proceeds of crime as untainted, so prosecution need not await completion of trial in the scheduled offence. The Court found the registered predicate offence and the materials, including the petitioner's statements and transfers to accounts linked to the petitioner, sufficient to disclose prima facie involvement. Claims of coercion in recording statements and the defence version involved disputed facts for trial, and no recognised ground for quashing was made out. The request to quash was rejected and the prosecution was allowed to continue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were liable to be quashed on the ground that the predicate offence had not culminated in trial and proved guilt, and that the petitioner's involvement was not made out.

Analysis: Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 creates an independent offence covering every process or activity connected with proceeds of crime, including concealment, possession, acquisition, use, projecting, or claiming such property as untainted. The absence of a completed trial in the scheduled offence does not, by itself, bar prosecution where the scheduled offence is registered and the materials disclose a nexus with proceeds of crime. The materials referred to in the order, including the petitioner's own statements and the transfer of substantial amounts to accounts linked to the petitioner, were treated as sufficient to show prima facie involvement. The Court also held that disputed questions regarding coercion in recording statements and the defence version were matters for trial, and that none of the recognised categories for quashing were made out.

Conclusion: The request to quash the criminal proceedings was rejected and the prosecution was permitted to continue.

---