Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether quashing of the scheduled offence and repayment to the victims barred the Enforcement Directorate from summoning or investigating the petitioner under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Analysis: The relief sought would have prevented the competent authority from exercising the statutory powers conferred under the Act to investigate, summon persons, collect evidence, and trace proceeds of crime. The quashment of the predicate offence insofar as the petitioner was concerned did not erase the possibility of money-laundering proceedings, particularly when the Act permits further investigation and additional complaint material against any person involved. Mere settlement with the victims or compliance with the quashing conditions in the scheduled offence did not wipe out the alleged proceeds of crime or disable the statutory machinery under the Act.
Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to an injunction restraining the respondents from summoning or investigating him under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Ratio Decidendi: Quashing of the scheduled offence, by itself, does not extinguish the authority's power to investigate or summon under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 where proceedings relating to money laundering and proceeds of crime may still survive.