Money laundering case: Couple`s assets frozen for cheating 3 London women
  • This Section
  • Latest
  • Web Wrap
Last Updated: Friday, December 13, 2013, 01:21
  
New Delhi: A special anti-money laundering court here has attached Rs 35 lakh land asset of a couple for cheating three London-based women by laundering the profits of their Rs 3.25 crore property located in Bangalore.

A criminal case of cheating and breach of trust was registered by Bangalore Police in February last year against one Noreen Anderson who and her husband allegedly cheated the three complainant by gobbling up funds generated through the sale of their property in the metropolitan city.

The police, which filed a charge sheet in this case in April, 2012, alleged that Anderson used the General Power of Attorney (GPA) given to her by the three women (from one family) for selling their property but did not share the profit with the owners thereby criminally cheating them.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) later registered a money laundering case taking cognisance of the police complaint and found that Anderson had purchased the Rs 35 lakh land property in Ooty from the money gained from this deal, identifying this asset as "proceeds of crime".

"The proceeds of sale consideration received by Anderson on behalf of and on the strength of GPA given by Marietta Pinto Hayes, Natalie Patricia Bamforth and Kelly Catherine Reade (all London based) were misappropriated and were used for her personal gain instead of giving the proceeds of sale consideration to the three women," the investigating agencies found in their probe and submitted in the charge sheet.

"It is further revealed from the charge sheet filed by the police and from the statements of Anderson given under Prevention of Money Laundering Act that she has projected, the misappropriated amounts, proceeds of crime as untainted money by utilising the same for her personal expenditures and personal investments (Rs 35 lakh property in Ooty)," the agencies said.

"On a thorough perusal of the provisional attachment, FIR, complaint charge sheet the investigations conducted by the police, ED under PMLA and the statements recorded... And on careful consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of the complainant and defendants....Comes to prima facie conclusion that the defendants (Anderson and her husband) have committed the scheduled offences, generated proceeds of crime and laundered them.

"No doubt the properties attached are proceeds of crime or value thereof and are involved in money laundering," the court of adjudicating authority of PMLA, Mukesh Kumar, said.

The adjudicating authority is the appellate mechanism against stringent enforcement actions done by the ED.

An attachment of an asset, under money laundering laws, is aimed to deprive the accused of the benefits of the tainted property.

PTI

First Published: Friday, December 13, 2013, 01:21


comments powered by Disqus