Bribe Giver is a party to Proceeds of Crime, liable to be Prosecuted under PMLA, rules SC [Read Judgment]

Handing over money with the intent of giving a bribe, then such a person will be assisting or will knowingly be a party to an activity connected with the proceeds of crime, the Apex Court ruled while interpreting Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).

A Bench consisting of the Chief Justice of India U.U. Lalit and Justice Bela M. Trivedi set aside a judgment passed by the Madras High Court in March 2021, which quashed the proceedings against Padmanabhan Kishore, the respondent under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) moved to the Apex Court challenging the High Court judgment.

In 2011, the CBI recovered Rs 50 lakh from an IRS officer, also an accused in the case. During the investigation, it came to light that the sum was handed over to the officer by Kishore, whose income tax file was pending the officer for clearance. A case was registered under Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988. Later, a case was registered by the Enforcement Directorate against the accused including the respondent under Sections 3 and 4 of the PML Act.

Allowing the ED’s appeal, the Division Bench said: “The observations made by us regarding involvement of the respondent are prima facie in nature and for considering whether the allegations made by the prosecution if accepted to be true at this stage, would make out an offence or not. Needless to say, that, on facts, the matter shall be considered purely on merits at the appropriate stage(s)… Consequently, the respondent shall continue to be arrayed and proceeded against in accordance with law in E.C.I.R. registered by the Enforcement Directorate.”

“The crucial part, therefore, is the requisite intent to hand over the amount as a bribe and normally such intent must necessarily be antecedent or prior to the moment, the amount is handed over. Thus, the requisite intent would always be at the core before the amount is handed over” the Court added.

Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanPremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.