Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy appearing for Hussain today before the top court, said that that anti-riot laws cannot be used to initiate money-laundering proceedings.
“The companies are legitimate. State prejudicing us through 3 FIRs of a dark time in this city’s history. Best case scenario [for them] is a GST offence, arising out of legitimate businesses. It is not a scheduled offence.“
She added that the High Court had extracted the prosecution complaint and relied on it simplicitor, in the absence of a first information report (FIR) for a money-laundering offence.
Justice Ramasubramanian then remarked,
“If a scheduled offence is there, complaint can be in any jurisdiction where the money is laundered. A scheduled offence wherever it is committed, an independent FIR can be registered. It does not mean that FIR will have to thereafter emanate after ECIR. If there is a causal connection between FIR and prosecution complaint, court only has to look at the allegations. Rest comes during trial.“
Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain appeared for the respondent.
Source: Barandbench
