Quashing of proceedings initiated under PMLA- Claim of the Respondent was that he is not a pubic servant and hence the amount in question, as long as it was in the hands of respondent, could not be said to be tainted money; that it assumed such character only after it was received by the public servant; & as such the respondent could not be said to be connected with proceeds of crime and could not be proceeded against under the provisions of the PMLA.

Madras HC had allowed writ petition and quashed the proceedings in PMLA- SC overrules. Apex court held that the requisite intent would always be at the core before the amount is handed over. Such intent having been entertained well before the amount is actually handed over, the person concerned would certainly be involved in the process or activity connected with “proceeds of crime” including inter alia, the aspects of possession or acquisition thereof.