HARI NARAYAN RAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard all parties at length. The petitioner is being prosecuted under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter called "the Act").

(2.) This writ petition has been filed alleging that the prosecution should be quashed, on the ground that it violates the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 20 (1) of the Constitution of India. More specifically the said fundamental right is said to have been violated because the acts constituting the offences, which are said to have generated money, were committed prior to 1.6.2009. Prior to that date the offences under Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act, which are given in the impugned complaint, were not mentioned in the Schedule of the Act.

(3.) All these offences were inserted in the Schedule by the amending Act of the year 2009 with effect from 1.6.2009. For appreciating the argument it is necessary to quote Section 3, section 2 (u) and 2 (v) of the Act :