TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 617
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nforcement, Chennai, registered an information in ECIR No.05/2012, following the registration of a complaint in Cr.No.71 of 2012 on 03.02.2012, for offences under Sections 120(B), 406 and 420 of IPC. (iii) The petitioner has challenged the proceedings in CC No.1 of 2017 mainly on the ground that the case has been registered in continuation of a predicate offence which is registered in Crime No.71 of 2012 for offence under Sections 120-B, 406 and 420 of IPC on 03.02.2012, wherein there is no specific allegation against the petitioner involving him for commission of any offence. It is contended by the petitioner that an offence under 2002 Act, cannot be dealt with before the scheduled offences have been tried and proved. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that no final report in relation to the predicate offence viz., offence in Crime No.71 of 2012 has been laid before the Court by the Investigation Officer viz., Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, Chennai-8. In this background, the learned counsel submitted that the PMLA authorities have no authority or power of jurisdiction to investigate or ascertain by any authorised legal process, at least to know what is the proceed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovisions to include any activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further has observed that a criminal activity may have been committed before the same had been notified as scheduled offence for the purpose of 2002 Act and if a person has indulged in or continues to indulge directly or indirectly in dealing with proceeds of crime, derived or obtained from such criminal activity even after it has been noticed as scheduled offence, shall be liable to be prosecuted for offence of money-laundering under the 2002 Act. 12. The conclusion of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal's case [cited supra] can be summarised as follows: (I)Section 3 of the 2002 Act has a wider reach and captures every process and activity, direct or indirect, in dealing with the proceeds of crime and is not limited to the happening of the final act of integration of tainted property in the formal economy. The Explanation inserted to Section 3 by way of amendment of 2019 does not expand the purport of Section 3 but is only clarificatory in nature. It clarifies the word 'and' preceding the expression projecting or claiming as 'or'; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a share holder in the business concern and the account was purely in the name of the enterprises, which is not connected with the petitioner, the case of the petitioner that he has no connection with the predicate offence under Section 3 of the 2002 Act, cannot be accepted. Despite the fact that the petitioner was not shown in any of the documents relating to the business concern of the 1st accused, the petitioner himself has admitted that substantial amount that was mobilised following the predicate offence alleged to have been committed by the 1st accused, was transferred to the accounts of the petitioner. In the statement of the petitioner it is shown that a sum of Rs.20 Crores had been transferred to the accounts of the petitioner. Though the petitioner states that a sum of Rs.16 Crores and a further sum of Rs.3 Crores had been re-transferred at the request of the 1st accused, still he has not accounted for the entire money that was allegedly transferred to the account of the petitioner. 15. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the statement of the petitioner under Section 50(2) and (3) of 2002 Act, was given under coercion and hence, it cannot be the basis ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised: (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission ....