Money-laundering was treated as a continuing offence, so the...

Money-laundering was treated as a continuing offence, so the PMLA was held applicable even though the properties were acquired before the 2009 amendment inserting Prevention of Corruption Act offences into the Schedule. Departmental permission or intimation for purchase did not prove lawful source of funds, and the appellants failed to establish licit acquisition or independent ownership. Prior seizure in predicate proceedings was distinguished from PMLA attachment, and attachment in third-party names was upheld even where some persons were not arraigned in the scheduled offence. The Tribunal therefore confirmed the provisional attachment and rejected the challenge to the properties as proceeds of crime.

---