9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 1497 - HC - Money LaunderingMonay Laundering - schedule offence - challenge to criminal proceedings - required sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act was obtained or not. The learned counsel for the respondent did not dispute the fact that the case against the accused No. 1/petitioner No. 2 herein which was a schedule offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was quashed by this Court in 2023 (2) TMI 1309 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT and therefore in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary 2022 (7) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT the proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act would not survive. HELD THAT - The prosecution of the petitioners/accused for the predicate offence under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 pending before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge Bengaluru (CCH - 1) is quashed - Petition allowed.
Issues involved: Challenge to criminal proceedings under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and legality of order taking cognizance.
Summary: The petitioners challenged the criminal proceedings initiated against them under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and the order taking cognizance of the offence. Petitioner No. 1, the wife of petitioner No. 2, was involved as her husband was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Despite previous orders in their favor, an order was passed attaching properties under the Money Laundering Act, which was later stayed. The respondent filed a private complaint leading to the Trial Court taking cognizance of the offence. The petitioners relied on a previous order quashing proceedings against petitioner No. 2 due to lack of required sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Citing a judgment of the Apex Court, they argued that the proceedings under the Money Laundering Act should not continue. The respondent did not contest that the case against petitioner No. 2 was quashed previously, acknowledging that the Money Laundering Act proceedings should not continue as per the Apex Court's judgment. Consequently, the petition was allowed, quashing the prosecution of the petitioners for the offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. They were set free from the pending trial before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
|
