CHENNAI: The trial in money laundering case cannot be paused or adjourned till the disposal of the predicate offence cases, a CBI special court in Chennai ruled on February 20.
Though a predicate offence case ending in acquittal or discharge would mean there can be no offence of money laundering, there is no bar on the court to try the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case, without waiting for the outcome of the predicate offence case, the court said.
The order was passed while dismissing a plea filed by M Haribabu, the proprietor of a diamond tools firm in Ongole, Andhra Pradesh, who is an accused in a PMLA case filed by the Enforcement Directorate in Chennai.
The PMLA probe was initiated based on a 2021 chargesheet filed by Chennai Customs accusing Babu of duty evasion of Rs 2.09 crore for allegedly misdeclaring and under-valuing payment for imports in 27 bills of entries. Haribabu had asked for adjournment of the PMLA case till the trial in the Customs case is completed which he said is moving at a very slow pace, while the PMLA case trial is at an advanced stage.
His contention was that if a predicate offence ends in acquittal or discharge, the offence under PMLA cannot exist. He cited judgments of the Supreme Court in various cases including the Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary vs Union of India, J Sekar vs ED and Parvathi Kollur vs ED to buttress his argument.
Appearing for the ED, special public prosecutor Rajnish Pathiyil contended the SC had held the offence of money laundering is independent from the predicate offence, arguing for dismissal of the petition.
The special court stated money-laundering is a standalone offence. The court can presume the existence of proceeds of crime under section 24 of the PMLA after studying the allegations in the predicate offence to decide the case.