Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2013 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 1588 - HC - Money LaunderingAttachment proceedings under PMLA - Proceeds of crime or not - Overriding provision of PMLA over Income Tax Act - Seizure of amount in bank account by the Income Tax Authority - Untainted money - Burden of Proof - HELD THAT- The ambit and scope of trial under the PMLA is totally different from that of the Indian Penal Code. - In case of offences under the Indian Penal Code under the criminal jurisprudence, it is for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. But in a proceeding under the PMLA, the onus is on the accused to prove that the properties seized are untainted and not the proceedings of any crime. The facts of the present case were considered and the provisions of the PMLA, being a Special Statute, it has overriding effect on the Income Tax Act and further considering the huge amounts of money, which are lying in the bank in the accounts of the petitioners as well as the nature of proceeding under the PMLA, more specifically, section 24 which provides that burden of proof is upon the person who has committed crime under Section-3 of PMLA and that the proceeds of crime are untainted property shall be on the accused. Thus Court opined that even if the petitioner no. 2 has been acquitted of the charges framed against him in the sessions trial, a proceeding under the PMLA 2002 cannot amount to double jeopardy, where the procedure and nature of proof are totally different from a criminal proceeding under the Indian Penal Code. Decision on this case Union of India v. Hassan Ali Khan and another,, while dealing with an order, by which the accused persons were granted bail by the High Court [2011 (9) TMI 847 - SUPREME COURT] was observed. It may be made clear that the question as to whether the inherent power available under section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised for quashing a proceeding initiated under the IMLA or not, is left open. In the result, the CRLMC, being devoid of merit, stands dismissed.
|