TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 103
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....minal revisions are considered and decided by this common order. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their respective names. 3. The facts leading to the filing of the instant petitions are as under : 3.1. One T.D.Naidu, father of Tataji and Sonia obtained huge loans from Andhra Bank and Union Bank of India for starting a medical college in the name of D.D.Medical College in Tiruvallur and also took amounts to an extent of Rs.16.65 crores from students, for giving admission without even getting the necessary permission from the Medical Council of India. In connection with this, several FIRs were filed by the Inspector of Police, Kanakamma Chatram Police Station, Tiruvallur. 3.2. Since the FIR regist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the income derived from the said properties and claiming the same as untainted properties. Thus, it is very well confirmed that Shri T.D.Tataji (A3 herein) has indirectly involved in the offence of money laundering and knowingly is a party in possession, acquisition and use of the proceeds of crime and projecting the same as untainted property. Therefore, Shri T.D.Tataji (A3 herein) has been guilty of offence of money laundering under section 2(1)(p) r/w Section 3 of the PMLA, 2002." 3.5. Similarly, the allegations against Sonia/A-4 in the complaint read as under : "10.4. Ms.T.D.Sonia (A4 herein), had knowingly assisted Shri T.D.Naidu (A1 herein), who has defrauded several persons including several innocent students, Andhra Ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he file of the Principal Sessions Court (Special Court for PMLA Cases), which was dismissed by this Court on 02.03.2021 with the following observations : "6.In the opinion of this Court, the date of birth given by the petitioner is a question of fact, which cannot be decided in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the same has to be decided only by the trial Court during trial. If it is found that with the proceeds of crime, the properties were purchased in the name of the petitioner whilst he was a minor, then it would be a good case for the petitioner before the trial Court." 3.8. Thereafter, Tataji filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.11655 of 2019 in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 2020 under Section 239 Cr.P.C. seeking discharge, which has b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nected with such property, which constitutes the offence of money-laundering. The Authorities under the 2002 Act cannot prosecute any person on notional basis or on the assumption that a scheduled offence has been committed, unless it is so registered with the jurisdictional police and/or pending enquiry/trial including by way of criminal complaint before the competent forum. If the person is finally discharged/acquitted of the scheduled offence or the criminal case against him is quashed by the Court of competent jurisdiction, there can be no offence of moneylaundering against him or any one claiming such property being the property linked to stated scheduled offence through him." Based on the above, he contended that Tataji and Sonia a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry to strengthen the mechanism regarding prevention of money-laundering. It is not right in assuming that the attachment of property (provisional) under the second proviso, as amended, has no link with the scheduled offence. Inasmuch as Section 5(1) envisages that such an action can be initiated only on the basis of material in possession of the authorised officer indicative of any person being in possession of proceeds of crime. The precondition for being proceeds of crime is that the property has been derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The sweep of Section 5(1) is not limited to the accused named in the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....09 of 2022 preferred by Sonia and Tataji, respectively, challenging the dismissal orders in their discharge petitions, stand dismissed. No costs. 11. Mr.ARL.Sundaresan submitted that the presence of Tataji and Sonia before the trial Court may be dispensed with during trial. 12. Accepting the aforesaid submission, the presence of Tataji and Sonia may be dispensed with on the following conditions : i. They shall appear before the trial Court on or before 01.12.2022 and execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- each under Section 88 Cr.P.C. without sureties; ii. They shall disclose the name of their Advocate, whom they have engaged in this case and shall also state that notice to the said Advocate, is tantamount to notice to them;....