TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1008
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nants. Acting on the recommendation, the Government ordered Crime Branch investigation into the FIRs registered at the Vellarada Police Station based on the complaints submitted by the deceived parents. Thereupon, the Crime Branch registered multiple cases under various penal provisions, including Sections 120-B and 420 of the IPC, against the petitioner and others. While the Crime Branch investigation was in progress, the Enforcement Directorate/1st respondent recorded ECIR/KCZO/11/2020 dated 12.03.2020 and started investigation under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) against the following persons; (i) Dr. Bennet Abraham, Director of Dr. SMCSI Medical College and Hospital (ii) Rev. A. Dharmaraj Rasalam, Chairman of Dr. SMCSI Medical College and Hospital (iii) Sri. P. Thankaraj, Former Comptroller of Dr SMCSI Medical College and Hospital and (iv) Dr. P. Madhusoodanan, Former Principal of Dr SMCSI Medical College and Hospital and other administrative officials. Thereafter, on 08.05.2024, the 1st respondent filed Annexure A1 Complaint against the petitioner and five others, alleging commission of the offence under Section 3 read with Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he PMLA against the petitioner, without he being accused of having committed the predicate offence, is nothing but an abuse of process of court. 3. Adv. Jaishankar V. Nair appearing for the Enforcement Directorate submitted that the challenge is premature since, as of date, all final reports filed by the Crime Branch have not been accepted by the jurisdictional Magistrate. Moreover, non-inclusion of the petitioner's name in the final reports filed with respect to the scheduled offences, will not absolve him from being prosecuted for the offence of money laundering. To buttress the contention, reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in Pavana Dibbur v. Directorate of Enforcement [(2023) 15 SCC 91] and that of the Madras High Court in P. Rajendran v Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement [2022 SCC OnLine Mad. 9007]. It is submitted that, from the investigation conducted by the Enforcement Directorate it had come out that an amount of Rs. 7,22,50,000/- was collected from 28 parents by promising admission to their children in the Dr. Somervell Memorial CSI Medical College, Karakonam. The investigation also revealed that the petitioner used to send parents of prosp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the proceeds of crime is guilty of the offence of money laundering. The process and activities connected with the proceeds of crime are concealment or possession or acquisition or use of proceeds of crime as well as projection or claiming of proceeds of crime as untainted property in any manner whatsoever. Going by the expansive meaning of the expression in Section 2(u), 'proceeds of crime' takes in any property obtained directly or indirectly as a result of criminal activity. As per Section 2(v) 'property' means property or assets of any description, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible, including deeds and instruments. A conjoint reading of the above provisions leaves no room for doubt that any person indulging, involving or attempting, or even assisting in doing any of the processes or activities enumerated in the explanation to Section 3 is guilty of the offence of money laundering. 5. The question whether Section 3 of PMLA is a stand-alone offence needs no further deliberation in view of the following exposition in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra); "134. From the bare language of Section 3 of the 2002 Act, it is am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duled offence as defined in clause (u) of sub-section (1) of 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 cha....