JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) I have heard all parties at length. The petitioner is being prosecuted
under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter
called "the Act").
(2.) This writ petition has been filed alleging that the prosecution
should be quashed, on the ground that it violates the fundamental right of the
petitioner guaranteed under Article 20 (1) of the Constitution of India. More
specifically the said fundamental right is said to have been violated because the
acts constituting the offences, which are said to have generated money, were
committed prior to 1.6.2009. Prior to that date the offences under Indian Penal
Code and Prevention of Corruption Act, which are given in the impugned
complaint, were not mentioned in the Schedule of the Act.
(3.) All these offences were inserted in the Schedule by the amending
Act of the year 2009 with effect from 1.6.2009. For appreciating the argument it
is necessary to quote Section 3, section 2 (u) and 2 (v) of the Act :
"3. Offence of money-laundering.- Whosoever directly or
indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or
knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process
or activity connected with the proceeds of crime and
projecting it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence
of money-laundering."
2 (u) "procceds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or
indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity
relating to a scheduled offence or the value of such
property."
2 (v) "property" means any any property or assets of every description, whether
corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible
or intangible, and includes deeds and instruments
evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets,
wherever located.";
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.