Hyderabad: The Enforcement Directorate on Wednesday contended before the High Court that IPC Section 467 was sufficient to register an economic case information pegister) under the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
A division bench comprising acting chief kustice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice A. Shankar Narayan was hearing appeals moved by the ED challenging an order of a single judge quashing the proceedings initiated by the ED against Tech Mahindra Ltd, (formerly Satyam Computer Services Ltd) in a Satyam Computers scam case.
Senior counsel T. Niranjan Reddy, appearing for the ED, it could not be held that a company was not liable to be prosecuted on the ground that Section 467 was not attractable to the company.
He said it was not necessary that the accused in CBI case and the ED case shall be same. He said a person not added as accused by the CBI could be named by the ED he came under Section 3 of the PMLA. The Satyam case fell under this provision, he said. He said that as per Section 24 of the PMLA, the accused had to prove that the amounts are not tainted.
Senior counsel told the court that in Satyam scam, the accused had raised Rs 2200 crore loans by pledging the shares of the promoters. He said without the name of the company, the case against other accused cannot be sustained,
