Skip to main content

Proceeds of Crime under Prevention of Money Laundering Act

 Proceeds of Crime under Prevention of Money Laundering Act

Money Laundering is a serious crime.

A money laundering scheme is a method of concealing the source of illegally obtained funds in order to make it appear as if the funds came from a legal or legitimate source. It is most often obtained through illegal activities such as robbery, drug/human trafficking, dacoity, murder, and other forms of corruption. "Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge in, knowingly assists in, knowingly is a party to, or is actually involved in, any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime, including their concealment, possession, acquisition, or use, and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of the offence of money laundering," according to Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2005.a

History of Acts Relating to Money Laundering The Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance of 1944 (also known as the Money Laundering Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance): However, only certain crimes such as cheating, breach of trust, and corruption were covered by this ordinance, rather than all of the crimes listed in the Indian Penal Code.

The Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976, provides that property belonging to smugglers and foreign exchange manipulators may be forfeited. This act primarily addresses the punishment for the assets of foreign exchange manipulators and smugglers who used to operate illegally in the foreign exchange market.

There is a penalty for property derived from or used in illegal trafficking in narcotic drugs under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, which was enacted in 1985.

The Anti-Money-Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act of 2002 (PMLA)

The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act was enacted by the Indian government in 2002, and it came into effect four years later, in 2005, after four years of implementation. Under this act, the government authorities were given the authority to seize any property, money or asset that was obtained from an illegal source or through the process of "money laundering."

When it comes to confiscated assets or money, it is the accused who has the burden of proving that the assets or money were obtained from a legitimate source. In accordance with Section 3 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, money laundering is defined as follows: "Whoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge in, knowingly assists in, knowingly is a party to, or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use, and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of the offence of money-laundering."


Although there are several issues pertaining to the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, the most frequently encountered is the interpretation of the term proceeds of crime, also known as Proceeds of Crime (or POC).

The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act categorises as an offence any type of transaction involving the proceeds of a criminal offence. If the confiscated property falls under the category of proceeds of crime, the money laundering offence is said to have been committed.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is the primary enforcement officer in charge of determining whether a piece of property is a protected piece of property (POC) or not. He has the authority to do so if he has "reason to believe" that the property is in his possession.

Proceeds of Crime are defined as "proceeds of crime, means, and property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to the scheduled offence or the value of any such property" in Section 2(u) of the Prevention Of Money-Laundering Act, 2005. For simplicity's sake, any property acquired by anyone as a result of committing any schedule offence will be referred to as "Proceeds of Crime" property. 

When the Government of India introduced the Finance Act of 2015, it clarified the definition of "proceeds of crime," as earlier offenders used to transfer the "Proceeds Of Crime" to another country and then flee from the country where they were arrested. After being changed by the 2015 amendment, the definition of "Proceeds Of Crime" was changed to read as follows: "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to the scheduled offence or the value of any such property [or, where such property is taken or held outside the country, the property equivalent in value held within the country] A subsequent amendment was made to Section 2(1)(u) of the Prevention Of Money-Laundering Act, in which the words "or abroad" were added to the definition of "Proceeds Of Crime," resulting in the following: "proceeds of crime, means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to the scheduled offence or the value of any such property, [or, where such property is taken or held outside the country, the proper currency


This means that property classified as proceeds of crime includes not only property confiscated as a result of schedule offences, but also any property that may be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity related to the scheduled offence, whether directly or indirectly.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more