Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2022 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1044 - HC - Money LaunderingNature of transaction - sale and purchase of land or merely investment in the property - scheduled/predicate offence or not - HELD THAT:- This Court find force in the arguments of learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners through their companies have only made investment of money and purchased the land, in a legalized manner through registered sale deeds from November, 2004 to November, 2005 and later on in the year 2006, the said 03 land owning companies were purchased by Atul Bansal of M/s. A.B.W. Group, therefore, there is no evidence on record either of applying for licence for the purpose of setting-up of some township for earning profit nor there is any evidence collected by the Enforcement Directorate regarding any conspiracy of the petitioners with other co-accused, much less at the cost of repetition, it is observed that even the CBI investigation led to the same conclusion - from the bare perusal of the allegations and the material collected in support thereof, it can be safely held that no prima facie offence is made out against the petitioners. As per Section 44 of PMLA, it is clearly provided that the trial of the "scheduled offence" of money laundering is to be tried together by the same Special Court, which is to try offence under the Code of Criminal Procedure, therefore, once in the "scheduled offence", the petitioners are cited as witness, their prosecution under the PMLA with the same set of allegations, is nothing but misuse of process of law. In the present case, neither there is anything to raise a presumption of fact or law that any of the petitioners were aware that the purchase of land by their companies, sale consideration of which was paid by another company and duly accounted for in their Income-tax returns and later on, the sale of the entire share in the company to M/s. A.B.W. Group through banking channels were “proceeds of crime” deriving from any scheduled offence - Even there is nothing on record to show that the petitioners were intentionally projecting or claiming any “proceeds of crime” as untainted one. Therefore, in the absence of the same, merely because in the scheduled offence, the CBI investigation suggest that the other accused who had applied for obtaining licence from the department of the State of Haryana in conspiracy with the State functionaries, wherein the petitioners are cited only as witnesses, in the absence of any material, the offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA is not attracted from the bare perusal of the complaint. The present petition is allowed.
|