|
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed an appeal filed by former Gujarat IAS officer Pradeep N Sharma, seeking discharge from charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in connection with alleged illegal land allotments made in 2004-2005.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale ruled that the allegations against Sharma constitute a continuing offence under the PMLA, and the quantum of proceeds of crime involved exceeds the statutory threshold, warranting thorough investigation and judicial scrutiny. Sharma had approached the Supreme Court after the Gujarat High Court, in March last year, upheld an Ahmedabad PMLA court's decision to reject his discharge application. However, the apex court found no grounds for interference, stating: "It is evident that the appellant has failed to establish any legally sustainable ground warranting interference by this Court at a pre-trial stage. The submissions made in support of the appeal are neither legally tenable nor in the best interest of justice." Sharma, who served as the Collector of Bhuj in May 2003, was booked for offences including cheating, forgery, and corruption. He was accused of misusing a 1997 land revenue policy--intended for allotting fallow lands to private entities--by approving land allotments in violation of regulations. He also allegedly issued a fraudulent certificate to a trust, facilitating wrongful land allotments meant for victims of the 2001 Gujarat earthquake. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Sharma, argued that the alleged offences occurred before the enactment of the PMLA or when the relevant offences were not included under the Act's schedule. He contended that, given the legal framework and ongoing deliberations on the retrospective application of the PMLA, Sharma could not be prosecuted under the Act for alleged predicate offences that predate its enforcement. Opposing the plea, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta contended that Sharma's criminal conduct continued even after the PMLA came into force. He pointed out that the sanction for the illegal land allotment was issued in 2006, and a chargesheet filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code in 2011 confirmed that the total proceeds of crime exceeded Rs1.32 crore, justifying action under the PMLA. After considering the arguments, the Supreme Court rejected Sharma's plea, emphasizing the necessity of a full trial. "A proper trial is necessary to unearth the full extent of the offence, to evaluate the evidence produced by the appellant, to analyze the complete chain of financial transactions, and to determine the veracity of the allegations and the amount of proceeds of crime. The legal framework under the PMLA serves as a crucial mechanism to ensure that individuals involved in laundering proceeds of crime are brought to justice and that economic offences do not go unpunished," the court stated. (ANI)
|
