New Delhi [India], December 15 (ANI): Delhi’s Karkardooma Court on Thursday dismissed the plea moved by former AAP MCD councillor Tahir Hussain.
He had sought a direction that the trial in money laundering under PMLA should be stopped as the charges are yet to be framed as a predicate offence (main case).
Tahir Hussain is facing trial on money laundering charges for allegedly funding the CAA protest. He is also accused in other cases, including the larger conspiracy of the Delhi riots and the Ankit Sharma murder case.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat dismissed the plea and said, “There is no judgement of the Supreme Court of India or High Court of Delhi to buttress the contention that the PMLA matter needs to be stayed till the time order on charge/conviction or acquittal is passed.”
“There is some logic in the arguments of counsel for the accused that if there is no conviction or acquittal, the judgement in the PMLA case cannot be passed. That does not mean that till the time charges are framed or judgement in the form of conviction or acquittal is passed, the evidence in the PMLA matter cannot be recorded as it would unnecessarily put an embargo on the case itself despite the fact that witnesses are available,” ASJ Rawat said in the order dated December 14, 2023.
In the order, the court referred to the Supreme Court judgement in Vijay Madan Lal Chaudhary and said that it has been held that a case under PMLA can only be registered if there exists a predicate offence. Thus, the existence of a predicate offence is essential for the initiation of a complaint or ECIR, in PMLA.
“However, the investigation into the PMLA matter is done by the Directorate of Enforcement, while the investigation into the predicate offence is done by another agency. Once the investigation in the PMLA has been initiated, it is tried as a separate case as well,” the court said.
The court observed, “Thus, a predicate offence triggers an initiation of a case under PMLA but is not only independently investigated but also independently and separately tried.”
The court further said that the case against an accused in PMLA has to be investigated, tried and proved independently of a predicate offence.
“Thus, the threshold created is that discharge or acquittal automatically puts an end to the proceedings under PMLA, regardless of the stage of the case or the nature of the evidence,” the court said in the order.
The court also said that it is also clear that if there is an order of discharge or acquittal in the predicate offence, then the proceedings in the PMLA case shall come to a stop. That does not mean that if there is an order on charge or conviction, there would also be an automatic conviction in a PMLA case.
“In such circumstances, to contend that until there is no charge or conviction, the proceedings under PMLA should be stayed is not mandated by law. If PMLA matter is stayed till charge or by the same logic till conclusion of the case by way of conviction, then witnesses, particularly public witnesses, may be lost, ” ASJ Rawat said.
Advocate Naveen Kumar Malhotra and Ritvik Malhotra appeared for Tahir Hussain.
Advocate Naveen Malhotra had argued that the money laundering case was registered on the basis of a crime branch registered for murder and criminal conspiracy.
He further argued that the trial proceedings in the PMLA case should be kept in abeyance as the charges in the main case have not been framed in the main case. He referred to the judgements of the Supreme Court and the Telangana High Court.
Advocate Malhotra further argued that in the main case, the allegations against Tahir Hussain are of murder and conspiracy and there was no proceeding for either of those offences. Therefore , the offence of money laundering is not attracted against Tahir Hussain.
There should be a proceeding of crime to attract an offence of money laundering, he added.
On the other hand, advocate Zoheb Hossain, special counsel and advocate Naveen Kumar Matta, special public prosecutor, appeared for ED.
Zoheb Hossain appeared through video conferencing and opposed the submissions made by the counsel for Tahir Hussain.
Counsel for the accused submitted that the predicate offence (main) must be tried first. A scheduled offence can not be tried prior to or simultaneously.
There must be a crime to attract an offence of money laundering. As per the prosecution’s allegations of murder and criminal conspiracy, there is no further crime. It is alleged that I (Tahir Hussain) funded the Dharna, as the counsel submitted.
The trial must be stopped until the charges are framed as a predicate offence. Unless the charges are framed as predicate offences, the trial in this case should be kept in abeyance, he submitted.
On January 11, 2023, the court framed the charges against EX MCD councillor Tahir Hussain in a money laundering case.
He has been charged with the offence of funding the Delhi riots of 2020 through laundered money. He has not pleaded guilty or claimed a trial. (ANI)
, https://www.aninews.in/news/national/general-news/tahir-hussain-pmla-case-court-dismisses-plea-seeking-stay-on-trial-as-charges-not-framed-in-main-case20231215225616
