TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 905
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka, accused No.2 is the present petitioner and three other accused. Approval as obtaining under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was sought from the hands of the Governor to investigate into the alleged crime against the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka. The Governor, in terms of his order, grants approval as obtaining under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, permitting investigation into the allegations against the Chief Minister and his family. The said grant of approval comes to be challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.22356 of 2024. This Court by its order dated 24-09-2024 negatives the said challenge and affirms grant of approval by the Governor to investigate into the allegations. 3. Pursuant to the dismissal of the challenge as afore-noticed, the concerned Court directs registration of a First Information Report ('FIR') to investigate into the offence as obtaining under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. The investigation is directed to be conducted by the Police wing of the Karnataka Lokayukta. Therefore, FIR in Crime No. 11 of 2024 comes to be registered against the Chief Minister, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....05, is acquired by MUDA. Against the said acquisition, the petitioner becomes entitled in terms of law for grant of adequate compensation. She was compensated by allotment of 14 sites. This becomes the subject matter of huge hue and cry and the Governor grants approval to investigate into the offence. The sites are surrendered. The petitioner is no longer in possession, enjoyment and usage of the said sites. Therefore, there cannot be an offence under Section 3 of the Act is what is submitted by the learned senior counsel. It is his further submission that the Enforcement Directorate should await the decision in the predicate offence to come to conclude that there is prima facie case of money laundering and there cannot be a parallel investigation. In all, the crux of the submission is that the petitioner is neither in possession, enjoyment or usage of the alleged proceeds of crime. He would submit that it is not even proceeds of crime, as it was compensation granted in terms of law by a statutory authority against acquisition of land of the petitioner. This would not become proceeds of crime is what the learned senior counsel would submit. On the aforesaid submission, the learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s an ECIR in ECIR F.No. BGZO/25/2024. The ECIR comes to be registered on 01-10-2024. A little walk in the history of the reason and registration of predicate offence in Crime No. 11 of 2024 and consequent registration of impugned ECIR is necessary to be noticed. The petitioner, as observed hereinabove, is the wife of the present Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka. Accused No. 3, her brother acquires certain lands which would come within the precincts of MUDA in the year 2004, having purchased them from accused No. 4 one Devaraju. Six years after the purchase, accused No. 3, the brother-in-law of the Chief Minister gifts the property to the present petitioner, his sister. The gift deed is in subsistence. MUDA is said to have acquired the property of 3 acres and 16 guntas which belonged to the petitioner. 11. Against the said acquisition, the petitioner registers a claim before MUDA for grant of compensation. MUDA assessed the compensation and allots 14 sites in lieu of compensation for the act of acquisition of land of the petitioner which was 3.16 acres. The value of 14 sites was assessed to be Rs. 56 crores. Based upon the said grant of compensation, investigation was per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esidential site bearing No. 25 formed in Vijayanagar 3rd Stage C Block Layout, Mysuru measuring East to West 24.00 Meters North to South 15.00 Meters totally measuring 360.00 Square Meters and bounded on the East by : Road West by : Site No. 89 North by : Site No. 26 South by : Site No. 24" Pursuant to the aforesaid deed of cancellation comes about the order dated 01-10-2024. The order accepting the surrender of the sites reads as follows: In terms of the afore-quoted deed of cancellation and acceptance of the same by the order with the surrender of sites, the allotment or the proceeds of allotment by way of its value was no longer with the petitioner. Yet another instance happened on the same day i.e., 01-10-2024. The Enforcement Directorate registers Enforcement Case Information Report, the impugned ECIR on the strength of the petitioner being accused No.2 in the predicate offence i.e., Crime No. 11 of 2024. The Directorate seeks to conduct investigation and later issued summons to the petitioner invoking power under Section 50 of the Act to enquire into the issue of money laundering against the petitioner. Whether holding of sites and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any other capacity, chits as defined in Section 2 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 (40 of 1982); (ha) "client" means a person who is engaged in a financial transaction or activity with a reporting entity and includes a person on whose behalf the person who engaged in the transaction or activity, is acting;] (i) "co-operative bank" shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (dd) of Section 2 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961); (ia) "corresponding law" means any law of any foreign country corresponding to any of the provisions of this Act or dealing with offences in that country corresponding to any of the scheduled offences; (ib) "dealer" has the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956);] (j) "Deputy Director" means a Deputy Director appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 49; (k) "Director" or "Additional Director" or "Joint Director" means a Director or Additional Director or Joint Director, as the case may be, appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 49; (l) "financial institution" means a financ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmitted in India and the proceeds of crime, or part thereof have been transferred to a place outside India or any attempt has been made to transfer the proceeds of crime, or part thereof from India to a place outside India. Explanation.-Nothing contained in this clause shall adversely affect any investigation, enquiry, trial or proceeding before any authority in respect of the offences specified in Part A or Part B of the Schedule to the Act before the commencement of the Prevention of Money-Laundering (Amendment) Act, 2009; (rb) "payment system" means a system that enables payment to be effected between a payer and a beneficiary, involving clearing, payment or settlement service or all of them. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause, "payment system" includes the systems enabling credit card operations, debit card operations, smart card operations, money transfer operations or similar operations; (rc) "payment system operator" means a person who operates a payment system and such person includes his overseas principal. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause, "overseas principal" means,- (A) in the case of a person, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns diamond, emerald, ruby, sapphire or any such other stone as may be notified by the Central Government; (t) "prescribed" means prescribed by rules made under this Act; (u) "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad; Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence; (v) "property" means any property or assets of every description, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and includes deeds and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets, wherever located; Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely- (a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever. ... ... ... ... 5. Attachment of property involved in money-laundering.-(1) Where the Director or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Director authorised by the Director for the purposes of this section, has reason to believe (the reason for such belief to be recorded in writing), on the basis of material in his possession, that- (a) any person is in possession of any proceeds of crime; and (b) such proceeds of crime are likely to be concealed, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the date of an order made under 32[sub-section (3)] of Section 8, whichever is earlier. (4) Nothing in this section shall prevent the person interested in the enjoyment of the immovable property attached under sub-section (1) from such enjoyment. Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section, "person interested", in relation to any immovable property, includes all persons claiming or entitled to claim any interest in the property. (5) The Director or any other officer who provisionally attaches any property under sub-section (1) shall, within a period of thirty days from such attachment, file a complaint stating the facts of such attachment before the Adjudicating Authority. ... ... 50. Powers of authorities regarding summons, production of documents and to give evidence, etc.-(1) The Director shall, for the purposes of Section 13, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely:- (a) discovery and inspection; (b) enforcing the attendance of any person, including any officer of a [reporting enti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of documents and to give evidence. The interpretation of the aforesaid provisions and their purport need not detain this court for long or delve deep into the matter. 13. A Three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in the case of VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY v. UNION OF INDIA (2023) 12 SCC 1, has in elaboration, examined threadbare the provisions of the Act. Certain paragraphs of the said judgment are necessary to be noticed and they read as follows: "106. The "proceeds of crime" being the core of the ingredients constituting the offence of money laundering, that expression needs to be construed strictly. In that, all properties recovered or attached by the investigating agency in connection with the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence under the general law cannot be regarded as proceeds of crime. There may be cases where the property involved in the commission of scheduled offence attached by the investigating agency dealing with that offence, cannot be wholly or partly regarded as proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (u) of the 2002 Act - so long as the whole or some portion of the property has been derived or obtained by any person "as a resu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f "property" also contains Explanation which is for the removal of doubts and to clarify that the term property includes property of any kind used in the commission of an offence under the 2002 Act or any of the scheduled offences. 108. In the earlier part of this judgment, we have already noted that every crime property need not be termed as proceeds of crime but the converse may be true. Additionally, some other property if purchased or derived from the proceeds of crime even such subsequently acquired property must be regarded as tainted property and actionable under the Act. For, it would become property for the purpose of taking action under the 2002 Act which is being used in the commission of offence of money laundering. Such purposive interpretation would be necessary to uphold the purposes and objects for enactment of the 2002 Act. 109. Tersely put, it is only such property which is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence that can be regarded as proceeds of crime. The authorities under the 2002 Act cannot resort to action against any person for money laundering on an assumption that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....untainted property to constitute an offence of money laundering on its own. The act of projecting or claiming proceeds of crime to be untainted property presupposes that the person is in possession of or is using the same (proceeds of crime), also an independent activity constituting offence of money laundering. In other words, it is not open to read the different activities conjunctively because of the word "and". If that interpretation is accepted, the effectiveness of Section 3 of the 2002 Act can be easily frustrated by the simple device of one person possessing proceeds of crime and his accomplice would indulge in projecting or claiming it to be untainted property so that neither is covered under Section 3 of the 2002 Act. 134. From the bare language of Section 3 of the 2002 Act, it is amply clear that the offence of money laundering is an independent offence regarding the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime which had been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to or in relation to a scheduled offence. The process or activity can be in any form - be it one of concealment, possession, acquisition, use of proceeds of crime as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from direct association of the crime. 136.2. Layering : which is disguising the trail to foil pursuit. 136.3. Integration : which is making the money available to the criminal from what seem to be legitimate sources. ... ... 143. However, in the present case we find that the Explanation only sets forth in motion to clear the mist around the main definition, if any. It is not to widen the ambit of Section 3 of the 2002 Act as such. Further, the meaning ascribed to the expression "and" to be read as "or" is in consonance with the contemporary thinking of the international community and in consonance with the Vienna and Palermo Conventions. ... ... 150. Be it noted that the authority of the authorised officer under the 2002 Act to prosecute any person for offence of money laundering gets triggered only if there exist proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (u) of the 2002 Act and further it is involved in any process or activity. Not even in a case of existence of undisclosed income and irrespective of its volume, the definition of "proceeds of crime" under Section 2 (1) (u) will get attracted, unless the property ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....perty, 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 money laundering against him or any one claiming such property being the property linked to stated scheduled offence through him." (Emphasis supplied) The Apex Court considers various contentions advanced while defining what could be the proceeds of crime. At paragraphs 96 and 97, the Apex Court notices the preamble and the reason for bringing in the Act. It is noticed that it was enacted to prevent money laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from such money laundering. At paragraph 99 the Apex Court considers Section 2 (1) (p) which deals with money laundering and Section 2 (1) (u) which defines proceeds of crime. The A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the said provision, the said person must not only be involved in any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime, but must also project or claim it as being untainted property. (Emphasis supplied) The Apex Court holds that persons responsible for money laundering is wide. Whoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge would show that all persons who even remotely involved in the offence are sought to be rope in. Therefore, whoever actively connected with the proceeds of crime which would include concealing, possession or using such property would be guilty of the offence. The Apex Court further holds that one can be adjudged guilty only when the person involved in the process or actively connected with the proceeds of crime and the person projecting or claiming it being an untainted money. It becomes germane to notice the Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Madras in the case of S. SRINIVASAN v. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT 2024 SCC OnLine Mad.5418, wherein it is held as follows: ".... .... .... 29. Section 2 (1) (u) defines "proceeds of crime means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any perso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....32. Therefore, mere possession of proceeds of crime would be sufficient to invoke the provisions of the PMLA. Using the proceeds of crime by itself is an offence. Since the scope of Section 3 is wider enough to cover various circumstances in order to curb the economic offences, the High Court cannot restrict its meaning so as to restrain the authorities from invoking the provisions of the PMLA. 33. Section 24 of the PMLA denotes "burden of proof". "In any proceeding relating to proceeds of crime under the PMLA in a case of a person charged with offence of money laundering under Section 3, the authority or court shall unless the contrary is proved presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering and in the case of any other person, the authority or court may presume that such proceeds of crime involved in money laundering". Therefore, the presumptions of the authorities, investigation conducted and documents collected would be sufficient to proceed against a person under the PMLA. Unless contrary is proved, presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering. Therefore, the burden of proof lies on the affected person, who in turn has to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with "proceeds of crime", namely- (a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (a) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with "proceeds of crime" is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the "proceeds of crime" by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.] Section 4. "Punishment for money-laundering.- Whoever commits the offence of money-laundering shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine [* * *]: Provided that where the "proceeds of crime" involved in money-laundering relates to any offence....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aras, the alleged offence manifestly has not resulted in any "proceed of crime" in favour of the petitioners herein. A-fortiori, it cannot be said that the petitioners have indulged in any activity connected with the "proceeds of crime" for unless there are "proceeds of crime", there cannot be any activity about the "proceeds of crime", in that, existence of "proceeds of crime" pursuant to the predicate offence is sine qua non for commission of offence of money-laundering, to be precise that if there is no money or property, a question of money-laundering would not arise. A reference in this regard to the judgment of the Apex Court passed in case titled as Vijay Mananlal Choudhary and others vs. Union of India and others reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 929 would be relevant, wherein at para 283 and 284 following has been held:- "283. Even though, the 2002 Act is a complete Code in itself, it is only in respect of matters connected with offence of money-laundering, and for that, existence of "proceeds of crime" within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (u) of the Act is quintessential. Absent existence of "proceeds of crime", as aforesaid, the authorities under the 2002 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and was released in favour of the said land owners by the orders of the Apex Court cannot be overlooked, in that, if the said money in the accounts of the land owners was "proceeds of crime", the same would not have been ordered to be released in favour of the land owners and treating the said money in the accounts of the land owners for the purpose of making out a case of money-laundering against the petitioners herein under said circumstances cannot but said to be not only abuse of process of law, but as well an attempt to overreach the orders of the Apex Court, in that, the transaction between the land owners and the Society essentially has been treated as a genuine transaction by the Apex Court while ordering release of money in question in favour of the land owners. 17. Thus, what emanates from the above is that none of the ingredients of the offence of money-laundering against the petitioners herein is found to be existing in the present case, more so in view of the fact that an act of mortgaging the property with the Bank for securing the loan that is said to have been obtained fraudulently without following Banking rules and regulations cannot by any stretch of im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gned summons/notices issued under Section 50 of PMLA, 2002 and the various statements recorded thereunder, be sustained under the law? iv. Whether, in the course of its administration and execution of the PMLA, 2002, the attachment of property under Section 5 of the Act must mandatorily precede the conduct of search and seizure under Section 17 of the said Act?" (Emphasis supplied) Issue No. 3 is germane to be considered for resolution of the lis, as the petitioner in the case at hand has also been issued summons under Section 50, like the petitioner who had been issued summons in the said case. Certain findings of the coordinate Bench prior to answering of the said issue are also necessary to be noticed. The coordinate Bench holds as follows: "Discussion and Analysis 9. Before delving into the issues raised for consideration, it is necessary to advert to the relevant provisions of the Act. 9.1. Section 2 (1) (na) of the PMLA, 2002, defines the term investigation as; "including all the proceedings under this Act conducted by the Director or by an authority authorised by the Central Government under this Act for the collection....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ceeds of crime in relation to a criminal activity relating to any scheduled offence, specified in the schedule; and 2) Evidence of actual involvement or animus/intention on part of the accused in the scheduled offence(s), or any other person, subsequent to the accomplishment of the scheduled offence, to assist in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including, its - a) concealment, or b) possession, or c) acquisition, or d) use, or e) projecting or claiming the proceeds of the crime as untainted property. 3) Mere inadvertent possession or incidental handling of the property (proceeds of crime), without the requisite criminal intent, would not suffice to attract an offence under Section 3. 4) It is relevant to note that any process or activity connected with the proceeds of the crime comes to a close only upon cessation of illicit gains. 5) i) The scope of concealment includes removal, disposal or movement of the proceeds of crime in such a manner as to hide its illicit origins. ii) The scope of use, projection or claim of proceeds of crime as untainted property includes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osecution under the Act. There is no formal accusation brought against the summoned individual at this stage, to warrant invoking the constitutional guarantee under Article 20 (3). 38. In the case of Abhishek Banerjee v. Directorate of Enforcement (2024) INSC 668, the Supreme Court dealt with a challenge to the issuance of summons and reaffirmed the ratio enunciated in the case of Vijay Madanlal and held that summons can be issued even to witnesses during the inquiry. It further stated that the procedure under the Act and its rules require the officer issuing the summons to follow Rule 11 of the PMLA Rules, 2005 which mandates the issuance of summons in Form V. The summons must include details such as the name, designation, and address of the summoning officer. 39. The Supreme Court in the case of Mahabir Prasad Rungta v. Directorate of Enforcement, in SLP (Crl) No. 12353/2024, also followed the Vijay Madanlal case and stated that money laundering charges under the PMLA cannot be concluded until the trial for the predicate offence is completed. 40. In Sudarshan Ramesh v. Union of India (2023) SCC OnLine Kar 71, a coordinate Bench of this Court dealt with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....houdhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1929, where the Supreme Court observed that the provisions of the PMLA, 2002 aim not only to investigate money laundering but also to prevent money laundering and confiscate any property related to money laundering. The Court noted that the trifold objectives of the Act make it distinct from the process of investigating a scheduled offence. The Court further held that the authority conducting the search under Section 17 of the Act must forward a copy of the recorded reasons and material in its possession to the adjudicating authority in a sealed envelope immediately after the search and seizure. This procedure ensures that the contents are not tampered with, thereby guaranteeing procedural fairness and accountability. The Apex Court also noted that Section 62 of the Act provides punishment for officials conducting vexatious searches. 43.1. Relying on the above, in response to the allegation that the impugned search was arbitrary, the learned ASG argued that the PMLA has in-built safeguards against arbitrariness and misuse of power, and therefore, this Court should not be compelled to review the search and issuan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....50 of the PMLA were challenged, and one of the petitioners therein claimed to have been illegally detained and tortured into making false statements, the High Court of Delhi ruled that enforcement officers have the authority to summon and examine any person for investigative purposes. The Court stated that a person summoned under Section 50 is not necessarily an accused at that time; they may become an accused later if arrested or prosecuted. It further held that no one can avoid responding to a summons simply because of the apprehension that they might be prosecuted in the future. 48. In the case of Raghav Bahl v. Enforcement Directorate (WP (Crl.) No.2392/2021), the Delhi High Court referred to the above case and also to case Kirit Shrimankar (supra). It concluded that there was no violation of the petitioner's fundamental or legal rights that would warrant intervention by the writ court at the summons stage. 49. In the case of State of Gujarat v. Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer, (2023) SCC OnLine SC 1043, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dealt with a challenge to summons under Section 145 of the Central Excise Act and Section 69 of the Goods and Services Tax Act. The pet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no proper reason to warrant such a search. The respondent-Agency can summon any person to record a statement or produce a document or record only in cases where there is credible evidence that an offence under Section 3 of PMLA has been committed, and in such circumstances, the person who has been summoned cannot raise any grievance against the issuance of summons. 54. Thus, in light of the circumstances of this case, where no prima facie case has been established showing that an offence has been committed under the PMLA, and no incriminating material has been elicited at the time of search and seizure, the issuance of summons to the petitioner lacks legal authority. The petitioners cannot be compelled to appear and record their statements or produce documents, as such actions would unjustly infringe upon their personal right to liberty." The coordinate Bench holds that for an offence under Section 3 of the Act there should be possession, concealment, enjoyment and usage of the proceeds of crime, be it property or funds. Issue No. 3 quoted supra is answered by the coordinate Bench in favour of the petitioner therein. The coordinate Bench holds that when there is no prim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceeds of crime to constitute an offence under Section 3 of the PMLA, 2002. 26. Furthermore, mere possession of a site that was allegedly illegally allotted to an accused in connection with a scheduled offence does not, by itself, constitute an offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), unless the essential ingredients of the offence as defined under Section 3 of the Act are satisfied. ... ... ... 34. It is now well settled that reason to believe must exist on the basis of evidence regarding the existence of certain facts. In the instant case, no such material as was in possession at the time of search, has been furnished to this Court to probablize the purported involvement of the petitioner. In absence of the same, any conclusion arrived at necessitating the search does not satisfy the threshold of "reason to believe", as envisaged under the PMLA, and is therefore, no more than a mere suspicion of involvement in the offence under the Act. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned search and seizure conducted at the residence of the petitioner was unwarranted and based on unfounded suspicion, and is therefore, an abus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned Additional Solicitor General, the Enforcement Directorate has found a larger picture of corruption and laundering in MUDA to which the present petitioner is no way responsible. The information gathered qua others could be taken forward by the Enforcement Directorate in a manner known to law. But, those cannot be attached to Crime No. 11 of 2024. Even according to the investigation, search, seizure, and recording of statements, nothing has emerged against the petitioner, except the repetition of what was an allegation at the outset which formed the fulcrum of Crime No. 11 of 2024. Therefore, in the peculiar facts of this case, in view of the preceding analysis as also, the judgment rendered by the coordinate Bench, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner cannot be permitted to be prosecuted for offences under the provisions of Money Laundering Act through the impugned ECIR. However, the findings rendered herein are for the purpose of consideration of the case qua the impugned ECIR. This would not become applicable to proceedings in Crime No. 11 of 2024. The petition thus, deserves to succeed. 22. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ಕà³, ಕಸಬಾ ಹೋಬಳಿ, ಕೆಸರೆ ಗà³à²°à²¾à²®à²¦ ಸರà³à²µà³† ನಂ.464 ರಲà³à²²à²¿à²¨ 3-16 ಎಕರೆ ಜಮೀನನà³à²¨à³ ಸಂಖà³à²¯à³†: ನಅಇ 557 ಅಪà³à²°à²¾à² 96 à²:20.08.1997 ರ ಅಧಿಸೂಚನೆಯಂತೆ ದೇವನೂರೠ3ನೇ ಹಂತ ಬಡಾವಣೆ, ಉದà³à²¦à³‡à²¶à²•à³à²•à²¾à²—ಿ ಅಂತಿಮ ಅಧಿಸೂಚನೆ ಹೊರಡಿಸಲಾಗಿತà³à²¤à³. ದಿ:31.10.1997 ರಂದೠಅವಾರà³à²¡à³ ನಿರà³à²£à²¯à²¿à²¸à²²à²¾à²—ಿತà³à²¤à³, ನಂತರದಲà³à²²à²¿ ದಿ:15.02.1999, ರಂದà....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....¿à²¤ ಜಮೀನನà³à²¨à³ ಪà³à²°à²¾à²§à²¿à²•à²¾à²°à²µà³ ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸಿಕೊಂಡಿರà³à²µ ಸಂಬಂಧ ತಮಗೆ ಪರಿಹಾರವನà³à²¨à³ ನೀಡà³à²µà²‚ತೆ ಕೋರಿರà³à²¤à³à²¤à²¾à²°à³†. ಆಯà³à²•à³à²¤à²°à³, ಮೈಸೂರೠನಗರಾà²à²¿à²µà³ƒà²¦à³à²§à²¿ ಪà³à²°à²¾à²§à²¿à²•à²¾à²°, ಮೈಸೂರೠರವರೠಮೈಸೂರೠತಾಲà³à²²à³‚ಕà³, ಕಸಬಾ ಹೋಬಳಿ, ಕೆಸರೆ ಗà³à²°à²¾à²®à²¦ ಸರà³à²µà³† ನಂ.464 ರಲà³à²²à²¿à²¨ 3-16 ಎಕರೆ ಜಮೀನನà³à²¨à³ ಪà³à²°à²¾à²§....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....²¤ 'ಇ' ಬà³à²²à²¾à²•à³ 213 1524 4 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 3ನೇ ಹಂತ 'ಇ' ಬà³à²²à²¾à²•à³ 214 1524 5 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 3ನೇ ಹಂತ 'ಇ' ಬà³à²²à²¾à²•à³ 215 1524 6 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 3ನೇ ಹಂತ 'ಇ' ಬà³à²²à²¾à²•à³ 216 15 * 24 7 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 3ನೇ ಹಂತ 'ಡಿ' ಬà³à²²à²¾à²•à³ 331 8 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 3ನೇ ಹಂತ 'ಡಿ' ಬà³à²²à²¾à²•à³ 332 12 * 18 1218 9 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 4ನೇ ಹಂತ 2ನೇ ಫೇಸೠ11189 12 * 18 10 ವಿಜಯನಗರ 4ನೇ ಹಂತ 2ನೇ ಫೇಸೠ10855 12 * 18 11 ವಿಜà....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....²—ಿ ಪರಿಹಾರದ ಬದಲಾಗಿ ವಿಜಯನಗರ 3 & 4ನೇ ಹಂತದಲà³à²²à²¿ ಮಂಜೂರೠಮಾಡಲಾಗಿರà³à²µ 14 ನಿವೇಶನಗಳ ಕà³à²°à²¯ ಪತà³à²°à²—ಳನà³à²¨à³ ರದà³à²¦à³à²—ೊಳಿಸಿ ಹಿಂದಿರà³à²—ಿಸಲೠಬಯಸà³à²¤à³à²¤à²¾, ತಮಗೆ ನೀಡಿದ ಪರಿಹಾರದ ನಿವೇಶನಗಳನà³à²¨à³ ಸà³à²µ-ಇಚà³à²›à³†à²¯à²¿à²‚ದ ಪà³à²°à²¾à²§à²¿à²•à²¾à²°à²•à³à²•à³† ಮರಳಿ ಹಸà³à²¤à²¾à²‚ತರಿಸಲೠಉಲà³à²²à³‡à²– (2)ರಂತೆ ಅರà³à²œà²¿ ಸà....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ೆಯಿಂದ ಪà³à²°à²¾à²§à²¿à²•à²¾à²°à²•à³à²•à³† ಒಪà³à²ªà²¿à²¸à²²à³/ಹಿಂದಿರà³à²—ಿಸಲೠಕೋರಿರà³à²µà³à²¦à²°à²¿à²‚ದ ಸದರಿಯವರ ಮನವಿಯನà³à²¨à³ ಪರಿಗಣಿಸà³à²¤à³à²¤à²¾, ಮಂಜೂರಾತಿ ಪತà³à²°à²¦à²²à³à²²à²¿ ಸರà³à²•à²¾à²°à²¦ ಅಧಿಸೂಚನೆ ಸಂಖà³à²¯à³†: ಯà³à²¡à²¿à²¡à²¿/8ಟಿಟಿಪಿ/2014, ದಿ:11.02.2015 ಅನà³à²¨à³ ನಮೂದಿಸಿ ಶೇ.50:50 ಅನà³à²ªà²¾à²¤à²¦à²²à³à²²à²¿ ದರ ರಹಿತವಾಗಿ ನಿವೇಶನಗಳನà³à²¨à³ ಹಂಚಿಕೆ à²....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....²¯à²µà²¾à²¦à²·à³à²Ÿà³ ವಿಳಂಬವಿಲà³à²²à²¦à³†, ಸದರಿ ನಿವೇಶನದ ಬೆಲೆಯ ಸಂಬಂಧದಲà³à²²à²¿ ಹಂಚಿಕೆ ಪಡೆದವನೠಪà³à²°à²¾à²§à²¿à²•à²¾à²°à²•à³à²•à³† ಸಂದಾಯ ಮಾಡಿದ ಎಲà³à²²à²¾ ಮೊಬಲಗನà³à²¨à³ ಸಂದಾಯ ಮಾಡಲà³" ಅವಕಾಶ ಕಲà³à²ªà²¿à²¸à²¿à²°à³à²µà³à²¦à²°à²¿à²‚ದ ಸದರಿ ನಿಯಮಗಳಂತೆ ಹಾಗೂ à²à²• ಸದಸà³à²¯ ಸಮಿತಿಯ ವರದಿ/ಲೋಕಾಯà³à²•à³à²¤ ತನಿಖೆ ಹಾಗೂ ಇನà³à²¨à²¿à²¤à²°à³† à....