Reaffirming that money laundering is not a one-time act but a continuous offence, the Supreme Court has refused to discharge former Gujarat IAS officer Pradeep Sharma in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Sharma, accused of receiving bribes while serving as a Collector, argued that the alleged offences occurred before the PMLA was enacted. However, the Court ruled that laundering continues as long as illicit funds are concealed, utilized, or presented as legitimate assets.
Citing its earlier decision in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary v. Union of India, the Court emphasized that money laundering remains prosecutable regardless of when the original crime occurred. The ruling clarified that what matters is not the date of the predicate offence but the point at which the accused engages in financial activities tied to illicit proceeds.
The judgment stressed the severe impact of financial crimes, noting that money laundering deprives the economy of legitimate investment and revenue. Given these stakes, the Court urged a strict judicial approach at the pre-trial stage to prevent offenders from exploiting legal loopholes.
With these findings, Sharma’s appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the judiciary’s firm stance on economic offences under the PMLA.