Effect of Acquittal/Discharge in Predicate Offence on Proceedings under PMLA, 2002

Effect of Acquittal/Discharge in Predicate Offence on Proceedings under PMLA, 2002

Effect of Scheduled Offence Occurring before the year 2005 on Proceedings under PMLA, 2002

ED v. Hi-Tech Mercantile India Pvt Ltd [2025] GCtR 1918 (Delhi) has answered issued on PMLA, 2002 and petition filed by ED was allowed. S.3 of PMLA, 2002 was discussed. In this case, coal block allocation took place before the year 2005 and despite that, the action initiated under PMLA, 2002 were not held invalid.

It was held that continuing nature of the offence of money laundering is recognised under explanation (ii) to Section 3 of the PMLA, which highlights that the said offence persists as long as the proceeds of crime are possessed, used, concealed, or projected as untainted. ED is not confined to the timeframe or scope set out by the predicate agency. 

It was held that it is erroneous to conclude that since the first FIR and the consequential chargesheet were quashed by this Court, that there exists no criminal activity, consequently, there can be no proceeds of crime, thereby failing to attract the offence of money laundering under the PMLA. Therefore, at this stage, the Court ought not to have rendered conclusive findings premised on an outcome that lacks finality. More specifically, owing to the reason that, the quashing of the FIR and chargesheet was allowed at a preliminary stage, without delving into the examination of the facts, evidence and surrounding circumstances.