TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 521
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....OL/2020 - -<br>PMLA<br>SHRI BALESH KUMAR AND SHRI RAJESH MALHOTRA For the Appellant : Mr. Ruchir Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Prateek Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. N. K. Matta, Advocate FINAL ORDER This Order disposes of the Appeal Nos. FPA-PMLA-3597/KOL/ 2020, FPA-PMLA-3598/KOL/2020, FPA-PMLA-3599/KOL/2020, FPA-PMLA-3600/KOL/2020 and FPA-PMLA-3601/KOL/2020 filed by Shri Shiwanand Singh, Smt. Ram Piyari Singh (through LRs), Shri Santosh Singh, Shri Sunil Kumar Singh and Smt. Gitanjali Singh, respectively, against the Order dated 19.03.2020 (Impugned Order) passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority (AA) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) in the Original Complaint No. 1218/2019 (OC). The Provisional Attachment Ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sel contended that the predicate offence presently existing is only against Shri Samiran Kumar Mondal which was registered on 11.09.2017 under Section 7 and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA). Ld. Counsel further contended that the charge-sheet had been filed in the matter wherein Shri Ramesh Chandra Singh has been named as a witness and not been shown either as a conspirator or as accessory to the alleged criminal activity of Shri Mondal. Ld. Counsel contended that the Appellants herein have independent sources of income and no link whatsoever with the predicate offence. He further contended that in this matter the alleged proceeds of crime is of Rs. 20,000/- of bribe given to Shri Samiran Kumar Mond....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the Final Order dated 20.03.2025 ordered the following: "In the light of the judgment of the Calcutta High Court, the issue raised by the appellant in reference to the FIR other than the FIR where closure report has not been given cannot sustain, rather this Tribunal should not record finding going against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of appellant Ramesh Chandra Singh. The issue raised herein was decided by the Calcutta High Court. It is however, admitted that the judgment of the Calcutta High Court is challenged before the Apex Court and notice have also been issued. However, no favourable order exist to pursue the present appeal. We have considered the rival submission and find that only issue r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t jurisdiction, there can be no offence of money laundering against him. 6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Pavana Dibbur Vs. Directorate of Enforcement Directorate, reported at 2023 SCC Online SC 1586, relied on the ratio laid down in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra) and, inter alia, held as under: ".......... a. It is not necessary that a person against whom the offence under Section 3 of the PMLA is alleged, must have been shown as the accused in the scheduled offence; b. Even if an accused shown in the complaint under the PMLA is not an accused in the scheduled offence, he will benefit from the acquittal of all the accused in the scheduled offence or discharge of all the accused in the scheduled offence. Si....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in such subsequent case started by the CBI. Therefore, the dropping of such subsequent proceeding would hardly have much bearing on the PML Act case started in respect of first case concerning predicate offences. 10. It is also contended by the petitioner that parking of money fraudulently obtained by the accused in the first predicate offences case has not been alleged in clear terms in the present PML Act case. However, there is a clear inkling that the racket was organised by such provident fund employees as the petitioner. Without being guided by recommendations as required, illegal inspections were carried out, protection money demanded and taken. In fact, the prime accused in the first case allegedly acted under instructio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n mentioned in the Impugned Order. These findings are summarised as follows: A. From the statements of the Appellants and others, it is clear that the odd incomes shown in the computation sheet of Smt. Sangita Singh, Smt. Simran Singh, Shri Rahul Kumar Singh, Shri Shiwanand Singh, Smt. Rampiyari Singh (Deceased), Shri Santosh Singh, Shri Sunil Kumar Singh and Smt. Gitanjali Singh as income from tuition, brokerage, stitching or needle income are false declarations. B. None of them had a clear idea about the method of source of 'Commodity Trading Income'. C. The statements of the employers of Shri Santosh Singh and Shri Sunil Kumar Singh showed that the influence of Shri Ramesh Chandra Singh compelled them to pay Sh....