2023 (10) TMI 533

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... petitioner / A.1, the present criminal revision case is filed. 3 The petitioner is accused No.1 in S.C.No.107 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the offences Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, punishable under Section 4 of the said Act. The petitioner filed petition under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking discharge in S.C.No.107 of 2015. 4 As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner was the he conspired with other accused and received the keys of bank locker wherein the bribe amount was secreted by A.2 through his son. 5 The contention of the petitioner was that out of 22 witnesses, 21 witnesses did not state anything against hi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case do not attract the provisions of the PML Act. Therefore, the petitioner is ought to have been discharged on this count. 9 So far as the contention of the petitioner that the crime was registered in the month of May, 2012 and the PML Act was amended in the year 2013 and hence Section 3 of the Act does not attract to the case of the petitioner is concerned, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Vs. Union of India [2022 SCC OnLine SC 929], the amendment to the Act is only in the nature of clarificatory and that the said amendment shall have the effect from the date of enactment of the PML Act, 2002. Section 3 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 reads as follows: 3. Offence of money-laundering:- Whosoever dire....