TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1397
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the NDPS Act, Sections 25/54 of the Arms Act, 1959, and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Sadar Jalalabad, District Fazilka, remained stayed in terms of interim order, dated 10.04.2024, passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 2100 of 2024. 2. The petition has been filed on the following facts: 2.1. The petitioner was implicated and summoned as an additional accused in exercise of powers under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) after trial in case FIR No. 35 dated 05.03.2015 had concluded, vide order dated 05.03.2021. The proceedings arraigning him as additional accused were challenged, and finally decided by the Supreme Court by answering a reference as to whether the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. could be invoked after the trial was over. It has been held that once the trial Court pronounces the order of sentence it becomes functus officio, and has no jurisdiction to pass an order under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the order summoning the petitioner as additional accused was set aside vide order dated 09.02.2023. 2.2. In the meanwhile, searches were carried out by the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same as untainted property. As such, he has committed the offence of money laundering as defined under the provisions of Section 3 punishable Section 4 of PMLA, 2002. 2.3. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application before the Special Court, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, seeking discharge in ECIR/02/STF/2021 for offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, which was dismissed vide order dated 20.09.2023, Annexure P-6. Thereafter, on the basis of further investigation he was arrested in the scheduled/predicate offence on 28.09.2023. In the interregnum, the State constituted Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the role of petitioner and other suspects in smuggling of drugs, etc. After investigation, which led to collecting of fresh material, supplementary challan/chargesheet dated 20.01.2024, Annexure P-7, was filed against him in FIR No. 35 dated 05.03.2015. It concluded that the petitioner had used his power and position to help co-accused Gurdev Singh in sale of drugs/contraband, and the money earned by the co-accused from drug smuggling was received by him. 2.4. The petitioner challenged revival of the proceedings against him in the scheduled offence, as also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st him under the scheduled offence. Both, validity of the arrest and prosecution of the petitioner, are under challenge before the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 2100 of 2024, wherein the prosecution itself has made a statement not to continue with further proceedings before the trial Court. Accordingly, there is no justification to continue the trial under the PMLA. The law in this regard has been settled by the Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others v. Union of India and others, (2023) 12 SCC 1. He also relied upon a judgment by the Telangana High Court in M/s Bharti Cement Corporation Private Limited v. Directorate of Enforcement, rendered in Criminal Revision Case No. 87 of 2021, decided on 08.09.2022, holding that outcome of the trial for the scheduled offence would have a definite bearing on the outcome of the trial for the offence of money laundering. And it would be in the interest of justice if the Special Court trying the offence of money laundering while independently proceeding with the trial, may, however take a pause and await the ultimate pronouncement/decision of the Special Court trying the scheduled offence. He, accordi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd 4 of the PMLA has been registered against the petitioner for the scheduled offence based on FIR No. 35 dated 05.03.2015, lodged under Sections 21, 23, 27-A, 29 of the NDPS Act, and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The petitioner was initially not named as an accused for commission of the scheduled offences, regarding which the trial got concluded leading to conviction of the accused therein, including Gurdev Singh. Thereafter, the petitioner was summoned as an additional accused in the case under Section 319 Cr.P.C. by the trial Court, vide order dated 05.03.2021, for commission of the said scheduled offences. The order was set aside by the Supreme Court on 09.02.2023. Thereupon, based upon subsequent investigation carried out in the case, the petitioner has been nominated as an accused and supplementary chargesheet, dated 20.01.2024, has been filed against him on the ground that he has used his power and position to help co-accused Gurdev Singh in sale of drugs and received the money earned by the co-accused from drug smuggling. He has challenged the revival of proceedings against him pertaining to the scheduled offences, as also his consequential arrest in the case; the matter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 crime (fully or in part) or retaining possession thereof or uses it in trenches until fully exhausted. The offence of money-laundering is not dependent on or linked to the date on which the scheduled offence or if we may say so the predicate offence has been committed. The relevant date is the date on which the person indulges in the process or activity c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 3 of the PMLA are that there must be a scheduled offence and that there must be proceeds of crime in relation to the scheduled offence as defined in clause (u) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the 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 of the PMLA as there will not be any proceeds of crime. Thus, in such a case, the accused against whom the complaint under Section 3 of the 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 the 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. Thu....