TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1692
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....06, 505(1)(B) I.P.C. between 21.02.2020 and 26.10.2020 alleging that M/s. Anee Bullion Traders, Anee Commodity Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Eye Vision India Credit Co-operative Society Ltd., Anee Bullion Industries Pvt. Ltd. etc had propelled many ponzi schemes in various places of Uttar Pradesh and lured the investors to invest money in the Companies under allurement of lucrative returns. Post dated cheques were issued to the investors but they were returned by the banks unpaid. The company showed forged title deeds of lands whereas the Company owned no land. The Directors of the Company have diverted the investors money to other related Companies and used the same for acquiring of movable / immovable assets in the name of close relatives of the Directors. 4. On 08.03.2021, the Directorate of Enforcement registered ECIR/LKZO/12/2021 against five persons, including the applicant and her husband Ajit Kumar Gupta, stating that it appeared to be expedient to make inquiries against the accused persons regarding illegal earnings, which may be proceeds of crime i.e. tainted money earned out of the criminal activities under Sections 120-B, 323, 406, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 470, 471, 504, 506, 505....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 1.56 crores and she is in possession of Rs. 11 lakhs earned as profit which has been derived directly from the proceeds of crime. 8. The investigation has revealed that the applicant has assisted her husband Ajit Kumar Gupta in concealment of proceeds of crime to the tune Rs. 76 lakhs which she received in her account from Anee Group of Companies and she used this money of the investors for making payments to Lucknow Development Authority for changing the land use of a property situated at Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. However, this could not be accomplished and Lucknow Development Authority refunded Rs. 76 Lakhs to the bank account of the applicant on 24.11.2020. 9. The complaint states that thus, it is clear that the applicant actively and knowingly assisted her husband Ajit Kumar Gupta in acquisition, possession, layering, concealment and utilization of proceeds of crime to the tune of Rs. 2.03 crores and, therefore, she has committed the offence of money laundering as defined under Section 3 and punishable under Section 4 of PMLA, 2002. 10. The applicant was made an accused in 12 cases relating to the scheduled offences but after investigation, her name has not been included in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t in Enforecement Directorate v. Gagandeep Singh: 2022 SCC OnLine Del 514, wherein a Single Judge Bench of Delhi High Court held that: - "30. The offence of money laundering, however, is not to be appreciated in isolation but is to be read with the complementary provisions, that is, the offences enlisted in the Schedule of the Act. The bare perusal of the abovementioned provisions of the PMLA establishes the prerequisite relation between the commission of scheduled offences under the PMLA and the subsequent offence of money laundering. The language of Section 3 clearly implies that the money involved in the offence of money laundering is necessarily the proceeds of crime, arising out of a criminal activity in relation to the scheduled offences enlisted in the Schedule of the Act. Hence, the essential ingredients for the offence of Section 3 of the PMLA become, first, the proceeds of crime, second, proceeds of crime arising out of the offences specified in the Schedule of the Act and third, the factum of knowledge while commission of the offence of money laundering. In the present matter, at the initial stage of proceedings, the respondents were charged for offences under Sections....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ril 2019 in Crime No.39 of 2019. It was thereafter, the writ petitioner filed Crl.O.P.No. 15869 of 2019 before this Court, to quash the FIR on various grounds. This Court was pleased to order stay of investigation in Crime No.39 of 2019 insofar as the writ petitioner is concerned. 9. However, it is the grievance of the writ petitioner that he has received summons from the respondent herein under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, to appear before the respondent on 09.01.2023 based on the impugned proceedings. * * * 14. The learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner relied upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others Vs Union of India and others reported in (2022) SCC OnLine SC 929, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paragraph No.467 (v)(d), has held as follows:- "467. In light of the above analysis, we now proceed to summarise our conclusion on seminal points in issue in the following terms: - (v) (a) 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 fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nywhere." 17. He has submitted that the aforesaid decision of Madras High Court was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) Diary No.28128 of 2023 and it was dismissed as withdrawn by means of the following order passed on 18.09.2023 :- "Shri S. V Raju, learned ASG submits that the FIR on predicate offence has been quashed on 10.05.2023. In such circumstances, the petition becomes infurctuous. The special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn as having become infurctuous. Learned ASG also wants this Court to observe that in this event quashing order is subsequently overturned by a superior forum, his client would have the right to revive the proceedings. We do not make any comment in that regard except Mr. Raju's client shall be entitled to take such steps in such situation as may be permissible under the law." 18. However, what the learned Counsel for the applicant did not point out, was that the order dated 13.04.2023 passed by the Madras High Court is merely an interim order staying the proceedings against the petitioner for the reasons recorded in paragraph 24 of the order: - "since the writ petitioner is not one of the accused in the case registere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt in ECIR/CEZO-I/17/2020, dated 23.03.2020, is quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed." 20. Citing an interim order passed by another High Court in a case which already stands decided long ago, does not reflect well upon the quality of professional assistance rendered by Sri Tushar Agarwal and Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 21. The tendency to multiply the number of judgments cited does not serve the interests of justice, as it results in wastage of precious time of the Court, which can be utilized to decide numerous other pending matters. This Court has time and again requested the learned Counsel to be precise and concise in their submissions and to refrain from citing irrelevant or unnecessary judgments. 22. Per contra, Shri Rohit Tripathi, the learned counsel for the Directorate of Enforcement has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pavana Dibbur v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2023) 15 SCC 91, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that: - "15. The condition precedent for the existence of proceeds of crime is the existence of a scheduled offence. On this aspect, it i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ute offence of money laundering. This offence otherwise has nothing to do with the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence - except the proceeds of crime derived or obtained as a result of that crime. 135.Needless to mention that such process or activity can be indulged in only after the property is derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity (a scheduled offence). It would be an offence of money-laundering to indulge in or to assist or being party to the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime; and such process or activity in a given fact situation may be a continuing offence, irrespective of the date and time of commission of the scheduled offence. In other words, the criminal activity may have been committed before the same had been notified as scheduled offence for the purpose of the 2002 Act, but 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 notified as scheduled offence, may be liable to be prosecuted for offence of money laundering under the 2002 Act - for continuing to possess or conceal the proceeds of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 3 PMLA. 18. In a given case, if the prosecution for the scheduled offence ends in the acquittal of all the accused or discharge of all the accused or the proceedings of the scheduled offence are quashed in its entirety, the scheduled offence will not exist, and therefore, no one can be prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 3 PMLA as there will not be any proceeds of crime. Thus, in such a case, the accused against whom the complaint under Section 3 PMLA is filed will benefit from the scheduled offence ending by acquittal or discharge of all the accused. Similarly, he will get the benefit of quashing the proceedings of the scheduled offence. However, an accused in PMLA case who comes into the picture after the scheduled offence is committed by assisting in the concealment or use of proceeds of crime need not be an accused in the scheduled offence. Such an accused can still be prosecuted under PMLA so long as the scheduled offence exists. Thus, the second contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant on the ground that the appellant was not shown as an accused in the charge-sheets filed in the scheduled offences deserves to be re....