NEED TO AMEND PART A OF THE SCHEDULE PART A OF THE PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT, 2002.
NEED TO AMEND PART A OF THE
SCHEDULE PART A OF THE PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT, 2002.
By -Advocate Aabad Ponda B. A. LL.B (Practicing in the Bombay High
Court on the Criminal Side)
The legislature seems to have
omitted to incorporate offences of criminal misappropriation punishable under
section 403 and 404 of the Indian Penal Code as well as offences of criminal
breach of trust punishable under sections 406 to 409 of the Indian Penal Code
while drafting the entire schedule to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act
2002. The schedule under the said Act gets its importance from Sections 2(x)
and 2(y) of the said Act which define
schedule and scheduled offence respectively. A conjoint reading of these two
sub-sections along with the principle definition of proceeds of crime as
defined under section 2(u) of the said Act and Section 3 of the said Act
clearly indicates that unless an offence falls within any of the Schedules to
the said Act, it gets eluded an excluded from the scope and ambit of the provisions
of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. In other words to invoke the
provisions of the said Act, it is a mandatory prerequisite that there must be a
scheduled offence viz. an offence falling in Parts A, B or C of the Schedule to
the said Act. Therefore classification and incorporation of offences in the
Schedule is an extremely important legislative function which must be carried
out to achieve the object of the Act.
The absence of offences of
criminal misappropriation and criminal breach of trust from the Schedule to the
PMLA Act, 2002 can cause hazardous effects and can allow criminals to escape
from the clutches of law because of this legislative omission. The offences of
criminal misappropriation and criminal breach of trust are serious economic
offences. There is absolutely no logic in excluding such offences from the
Schedule as it sends an unhealthy signal that persons who commit such crimes
are immune from the provisions of the PMLA Act, 2002, no matter even if the quantum involved is running into hundreds of
crores of Rupees. This proposition gets further amplified from the fact that,
if a person committing such an offence is a public servant or a banker, factor,
attorney, broker, agent etc. then even though such offences are serious and
punishable up to life imprisonment, yet they escape the provisions of the Act.
In contra distinction a mere receiver of the proceeds of criminal
misappropriation or criminal breach of trust, who's case fetches a maximum of 3
years punishment under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, will get covered
under the Part A of paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the PMLA Act. The law as it
goes and reads therefore carves out a greater punishment for a receiver of
stolen property than the person who actually generates the stolen property.
This is obviously contrary to the spirit of the Act and the purpose it seeks to
achieve. Public servants and powerful politicians who commit criminal breach of
trust and misappropriation of money escape from the provisions of Act because
of this legislative slip which needs to be seriously addressed to at the
earliest.
Comments
Post a Comment