Foreign Remittance Made By Using Forged Form 15CB isn’t “Proceeds of Crime” from Scheduled Offence of Forgery | HC

Case Details: Amit Aggarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement - [2024] 158 taxmann.com 380 (Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain, J.
  • Priyadarshi Manish, Ms Anjali Jha Manish, Ms Saksham Garg & Anmol Arya for the Appellant.
  • Ravi Prakash, Advs. Aman Rewaria, Yasharth Shukla, Ayushman, Astu Khandelwal, Ali Khan & Deepanshu Trivedi for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the case main allegation of the respondent/ED against the petitioner was that he made an outward remittance of a huge amount in the account of foreign entities on the basis of forged Form 15CB Certificates.

It was noted that, there was no property that was derived or obtained directly or indirectly as a result of criminal activity concerning the scheduled offense which can be regarded as “proceeds of crime”.

The petitioner argued that the unauthorized outward remittance by forged Form 15CB Certificates does not amount to “proceeds of crime” being generated from the scheduled offence i.e. fabrication of Form 15CB Certificates.

While applying for the bail plea, the petitioner argued that the twin conditions as per section 45 of PMLA are not applicable as the petitioner is a sick and infirm person and has already undergone repeated kidney surgeries and requires constant medical supervision and produced medical documents in his support.

In response, the respondent argued that the petitioner was avoiding investigation and his custodial investigation was required as the offence of money laundering involves multiple layers of placement, layering and integration.

High Court Held

The question that was raised before the Court was whether the act of foreign remittance facilitated through forged Form 15CB certificates amounts to ‘proceeds of crime’ pertaining to scheduled offenses such as forgery?

After considering all facts, including incriminating material against the petitioner which are the statements made by co-accused/witness under section 50 of PMLA and the fact that their evidentiary value can be tested at the stage of trial, the Court held that there was no generation of “proceeds of crime” from criminal activity and the petitioner being a sick and infirm person, the present anticipatory bail application was to be allowed.

Accordingly, the Court directed that, in case of arrest, shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer or any other authorized person subject to specified conditions.