2021 (8) TMI 134
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C.C.No.1/2019 that has been launched against him by the Enforcement Directorate for the offence under Section 3 read with 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short "the PML Act"). 3. Heard Mr. B. Kumar, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. S. Ramachandran, learned counsel on record for Dr. R. Gunaseelan (A2) and Mr. P. Saravanan, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the Enforcement Directorate. 4. To appreciate the rival contentions, it may be necessary to set out the foundational facts. 4.1. One Dr. S. Murugesan (A1) was a Member of the Dental Council of India and Dr. R. Gunaseelan (A2) was nominated by the Tamil Nadu State Government as a Member of the Dental Council of India. 4.2. Adhiparasakth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Directorate under the PML Act and after completing the investigation, the Enforcement Directorate has filed the impugned complaint against Dr. S. Murugesan (A1) and five others, in which, Dr. R. Gunaseelan has been shown as A2. 5. A reading of paragraph 7.4 of the complaint in C.C.No.1/2019 shows that the proceeds of crime has been determined as the sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- that was seized by the CBI in the clinic of Dr. S. Murugesan (A1) on 07.01.2013. We are unable to understand as to how, Dr. R. Gunaseelan (A2) can be prosecuted under the PML Act, for the seizure of Rs. 25,00,000/- by the CBI in the clinic of Dr. S. Murugesan (A1). 6. For maintaining a prosecution under Section 3 of the PML Act, the following three ingredients are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r completing the investigation, filed a final report in C.C.No.13/2014 in the IX Additional Special Court for CBI Cases against Dr. S. Murugesan (A1) and Dr. R. Gunaseelan (A2) for the offences under Sections 120-B read with Sections 7, 8, 12 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act. 10. This Court, by order dated 26.03.2019, quashed the prosecution against Dr. R. Gunaseelan (A2) in Crl.O.P.No.3177 of 2019, by holding that he was not at all involved in the alleged bribe that was received from Asan Memorial by Dr. S. Murugesan (A1). However, by the same order, this Court, dismissed the quash petition of Dr. S. Murugesan (A1) in Crl.O.P.No.17027 of 2014 and directed him to face trial. 11. Be that as it may, the Enforcement Directorate....
TaxTMI