Approver in scheduled offence case gets discharge benefit in connected PMLA proceedings under Section 132 Evidence Act

Calcutta HC dismissed revision petition challenging discharge of accused under Section 227 CrPC in PMLA case. The accused, who became approver in related CBI scheduled offence case, sought discharge claiming benefit of Section 132 Evidence Act. HC held that PMLA proceedings were directly connected to scheduled offence case where accused turned approver, as PMLA case depended entirely on materials from scheduled offence. Since both cases had direct connection and PMLA case would fail if scheduled offence case failed, accused entitled to approver benefits under Section 132 Evidence Act and Section 307 CrPC in PMLA proceedings. Trial court's discharge order upheld as legally sound.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the discharge of the accused under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. Applicability of Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
3. Impact of the accused being an approver in the CBI case on the PMLA proceedings.

Summary:

1. Validity of the discharge of the accused under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
The Enforcement Directorate challenged the order dated 03.10.2019 by the Spl Judge (C.B.I.) Court No. 3, Calcutta, which discharged the accused under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The accused, who was an approver in the CBI case, was discharged because the court found that implicating him in the PMLA case would be contradictory as he had helped the prosecution in the CBI case.

2. Applicability of Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002:
The court examined whether the accused's actions constituted money laundering under Section 3 of PMLA, which defines the offense as involvement in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. The court noted that the offense of money laundering is independent but directly connected to the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offense.

3. Impact of the accused being an approver in the CBI case on the PMLA proceedings:
The court relied on precedents, including the Supreme Court judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. vs Union of India & Ors., which clarified that if a person is acquitted or discharged of the scheduled offense, there can be no offense of money laundering against them. The court found that since the accused had turned approver in the CBI case, his evidence was crucial for the prosecution, and thus, he should not be implicated in the PMLA case. The court also noted that the accused was entitled to the protections under Section 132 of the Evidence Act and Section 307 of Cr.P.C.

Conclusion:
The High Court upheld the order of the Special Judge, affirming the discharge of the accused in the PMLA case. The court concluded that the findings of the trial court were in accordance with the law and required no interference. The CRR 1453 of 2020 was dismissed, and all connected applications were disposed of. The interim order, if any, was vacated, and a copy of the judgment was directed to be sent to the learned Trial Court for necessary compliance.

---