Merely being not named in predicate offence doesn't mean one can't be prosecuted under PMLA: Supreme Court
predicate offence does not mean that he cannot be prosecuted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the Supreme Court said on Friday while hearing a plea in a money-laundering case arising out of the alleged coal-block allocation scam. The observation came from a vacation bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, which was hearing a petition filed by one Sudhir Gupta seeking quashing of an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against him and the subsequent proceedings arising out of it.
The bench told advocate Vijay Aggarwal, who appeared in the court on behalf of Gupta, that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) ECIR could neither be quashed nor stayed.
Aggarwal told the bench that the petitioner was arrayed as a witness in a related case lodged by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), but the ED has made him an accused in the money-laundering case.
«Merely because you are not named in the predicate offence does not mean that you cannot be prosecuted under the PMLA,» the bench observed.
«My case is, I am a witness in the predicate offence,» Aggarwal said.
«We are not satisfied,» the bench said, adding, «We have examined the merits also. Neither the ECIR can be quashed nor can it be stayed.»
The petitioner's counsel told the bench that the matter is listed for arguments on charges before a special court in June.
He sought permission from the bench to withdraw the plea with the liberty to approach the top court later.
«Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
