Delhi Riots: Court Rejects Tahir Hussain's Plea Seeking Stay On PMLA Proceedings Till Framing Of Charges In UAPA Case

A Delhi Court on Friday rejected a plea moved by Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain seeking stay on the proceedings in a money laundering case registered against him in relation to the 2020 riots, till the framing of charges in the UAPA case alleging larger conspiracy in the violence.

Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat dismissed Hussain's plea and said that there is no judgment of the Supreme Court or Delhi High Court to support his contention that the PMLA case needs to be stayed till the time an order on charge or conviction or acquittal is passed in the predicate offence.

“There is some logic in the argument of the counsel for accused that if there is no conviction or acquittal, the judgment in PMLA case cannot be passed. That does not mean that till the time charges are framed or judgment in the form of conviction or acquittal is passed, the evidence in the PMLA matter cannot be recorded as it would unnecessarily put an embargo on the case itself despite the fact that witnesses are available,” the court said.

It added that to contend that till the time there is no charge or the conviction, the proceedings under PMLA should be stayed, is not mandated by law.

“If PMLA matter is stayed till charge or by the same logic till conclusion of the case by way of conviction, then witnesses, particularly, public witnesses may be lost. One may also see that witnesses in PMLA case and predicate case may be common but not necessarily the same. It is also not necessary that accused in predicate and PMLA case may be same,” the court said.

It added: “In view ofthe above discussion, the application filed by accused Tahir Hussain for stay ofthe proceedings stands dismissed.”

The PMLA case was registered against Hussain on the basis of the three FIRs lodged in relation to the riots - FIR No. 59/2020, FIR No. 65/2020 and FIR No. 88/2020.

In November last year, the Delhi High Court dismissed Hussain's plea challenging framing of charges against him in the case under Section 3, which is punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. 

According to the Enforcement Directorate, Hussain "hatched a conspiracy with his associates to fraudulently withdraw money" from the accounts of certain companies — M/s. Show Effect Advertisement Pvt. Ltd. (SEAPL), M/s. Essence Cellcom Pvt. Ltd. (ECPL) and M/s. Essence Global Services Pvt. Ltd. (EGSPL), "owned and controlled" by him "through bogus and malafide transactions with bogus entry operator on the strength of fake bills".

The ED's case is that he was the ultimate beneficiary of laundered money and used it during the riots in North- East Delhi in February 2020.

While framing charges, the trial court had observed that ED's complaint "made out a case" of Hussain working in conspiracy with Amit Gupta in generating proceeds of crime which was then put to use by the former for the "purpose of riots".