Brief Facts
- Directorate of Enforcement filed a complaint against the Petitioner under Section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The complaint was based on alleged scheduled offences under various sections of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Sections 120B, 191, 199, 200 and 204 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which offences, except for Section 120B of IPC, are not scheduled offences within the meaning of Section 2(1)(y) of the PMLA.
- The Petitioner challenged the complaint before the Supreme court.
Issues
- Whether the complaint filed by the Directorate of Enforcement, to the extent of not containing scheduled offences maintainable?
- Whether in absence of proceeds of crime, the complaint under Section 3 PMLA is maintainable?
- Whether the Special Court is required to apply the procedure given under 200 to 204 CrPC?
Held
- The Supreme Court partly allowed the petition and quashed the complaint.
- In this case, no scheduled offence is made out the basis of the complaint as the offences relied upon therein are not scheduled offences. Therefore, there cannot be any proceeds of crime. Hence, there cannot be an offence under Section 3 of the PMLA. Therefore, no purpose will be served by directing the Special Court to apply its mind in accordance with Section 203 read with Section 204 of the Cr.PC. That will only be an empty formality.
Relevant Para No.
- 7