The Evening Wrap: Maharashtra moves Supreme Court against acquittal of Prof. Saibaba

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court on Tuesday acquitted former Delhi University professor G.N. Saibaba, 55, and five others arrested in an alleged Maoist link case under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). A Division Bench of Justices Vinay Joshi and Valmiki S.A. Menezes pronounced the judgment and acquitted all the accused as the prosecution could not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against them. The appeal for rehearing the case was filed by Saibaba, Mahesh Tirki, Hem Mishra, Pandu Narote, Vijay Tirki and Prashant Rahi, who were sentenced to life imprisonment. The Bench reheard the wheelchair-bound professor lodged in Nagpur Central Jail, and pronounced the verdict. In October, 2022, a High Court Bench too had acquitted the professor. In March 2017, a sessions court in Gadchiroli had convicted Saibaba and the five others for alleged Maoist links and for indulging in activities amounting to waging war against the country. In the sessions court hearing, Saibaba along with two other accused had denied the allegations of possessing naxal literature for circulating among underground naxlites and the residents of Gadchiroli district to incite the people to resort to violence. Based on the charges of Section 45(1) of the UAPA by the Sessions Court, Saibaba had then appealed the Bombay High Court where a Bench led by former High Court Justice Rohit B. Deo too acquitted him and the five others. In the judgment, the High Court said, “While terrorism poses an ominous threat to national security and every legitimate weapon in the armoury must be deployed against it, a civil democracy cannot sacrifice procedural safeguards afforded to the accused.” The Maharashtra government has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Bombay High Court verdict. Supreme Court dismisses money-laundering case against Karnataka Deputy CM Shivakumar The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the proceedings instituted by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) against Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister and Congress president D.K. Shivakumar under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on the basis of an Income Tax department complaint in 2018. The complaint was filed following searches on the premises of Shivakumar and his associates in Bengaluru and outside the city. The I-T department had alleged that Shivakumar, who ran business concerns, “hatched a criminal conspiracy and engaged different people for the purpose of concealing unaccounted money and projecting it as untainted property” to evade income tax. Shivakumar had maintained that the case was motivated by political reasons. A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and K.V. Viswanathan passed the order on Tuesday on the basis of special leave petitions filed by Shivakumar and two others, variously represented by senior advocates A.M. Singhvi, Siddharth Luthra, S. Nagamuthu and advocate Parmatma Singh, challenging the jurisdiction of the Central agency. They had appealed to the top court against a Karnataka High Court judgment in August 2019 refusing to intervene in the case and upholding the summons issued by the ED. However, the Supreme Court issued notice on October 15, 2019, and directed the ED to not take any coercive action against Shivakumar, Anjaneya Hanumanthaiah, and Sunil Kumar Sharma. Shivakumar had argued that the ED had commenced “illegal proceedings” by registering an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against him under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The senior lawyers contended that the ED strayed far from its turf by basing its ECIR entirely on an Income Tax department complaint alleging tax and penalty offences. None of the offences were ‘scheduled offences’ under the PMLA, the petitioners said. “The admitted basis of commencing investigations under PMLA is a criminal complaint filed by Income Tax authorities, which alleged ‘criminal conspiracy’ punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code only for alleged commission of such offences punishable under the Income Tax Act and the Code,” Shivakumar’s petition underscored. Shivakumar had argued that with no scheduled offence alleged, there were no proceeds of crime. Evidence of crime proceeds was necessary to invoke money-laundering charges. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court referred to its recent Pavana Dibbur judgment, which had held that Section 120B would be deemed a scheduled offence under the PMLA only if the conspiracy had been directed towards the commission of an offence specified in the 2002 Act. “To invoke PMLA, the first requisite is commission or conspiracy to commit a scheduled offence resulting in the proceeds of crime. For invoking Section 3 of the PMLA against any person, it is necessary that a person must not only be involved in an activity connected with the proceeds of crime, but must also project or claim the proceeds of crime as untainted property,” Shivakumar’s plea said. Shivakumar had argued that even the Income Tax proceedings had been separately stayed by the Karnataka High Court in 2019. The prosecution complaint filed by the Income Tax department before the Special Court for Economic Offences was based on searches conducted in the premises of Shivakumar and his associates in different places in Bengaluru and outside the city. The complaint said that “during the search, certain incriminating documents and materials were found and seized”. It said Shivakumar had “active business concerns in the sectors of education, trust and real estate for a significant amount of time. In the course of conducting the business activities, there has been a modus operandi employed by him to engage different people for the purpose of concealing and projecting the unaccounted and illegal money as untainted property for the purpose of evading income tax. It was in this background that a criminal conspiracy to evade income tax and to enable the accused [Shivakumar] to evade income tax was hatched”. Sandeshkhali case | Calcutta High Court transfers probe into attack on ED officers to CBI The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday ordered the transfer of the probe into an attack on Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials at Sandeshkhali on January 5 from the West Bengal Police to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). A Division Bench of T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya also directed that the custody of suspended Trinamool Congress leader Sheikh Shahjahan shall also forthwith be handed over to the CBI, and that order shall be implemented by 4.30 p.m. on Tuesday. The West Bengal Police, however, did not hand over Sheikh Shahjahan to the CBI as directed by the Calcutta High Court order. A team of officials of the CBI visited Bhawani Bhawan, the headquarters of West Bengal Police where the accused has been lodged, but they had to return empty-handed. In an oral mention before Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, the West Bengal government urged for an early hearing of its appeal against the High Court order to hand over the case to the central agency. The CJI asked the State government, represented by senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, to approach the Supreme Court Registrar concerned with the listing of cases. Sheikh Shahjahan was arrested by the West Bengal Police on February 29 after villagers, particularly women in Sandeshkhali, held protests for days demanding his arrest. The allegations of sexual assault and land grab by Sheikh Shahjahan and his aides had triggered an outrage in the political circles. Earlier, a Single Bench of Calcutta High Court had on January 17 set up an SIT comprising officials of West Bengal Police and the CBI to probe the attack on ED officials and the Division Bench had stayed the order at the prayer of ED. “In the result, MAT no. 169 of 2024 and MAT no. 191 of 2024 are allowed, and the order passed by the learned Single Bench constituting the Special Investigating Team is set aside, and the writ petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate in WPA 802 of 2024 is allowed, and cases in FIR No. 8 of 2024 and FIR No. 9 of 2024 on the file of the Nazat Police Station and FIR 18 of 2024 on the file of the Bongaon Police Station shall forthwith be transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation,” the Division Bench said in the order. The court noted that Sheikh Shahjahan, who was arrested after being on the run for more than 50 days, is not an ordinary citizen, and it has become necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights of the public that the cases be transferred to the CBI. “He is an elected representative of the public, holding the highest office in a Zilla Parishad, he was fielded as the candidate at the elections held for the said post by the political party which is ruling dispensation. Thus, it has become imperative and absolutely necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights of the public in general and the public of the locality that the cases be transferred to the CBI for investigation,” the order said. The Division Bench also took note of the impugned order of a Single Bench where it has observed that the suo motu FIR – the FIR No. 8 of 2024 – did not contain relevant provisions of the law and presented a rather watered-down version. The ED raid on the residence of Sheikh Shahjahan on January 5 was in connection with the public distribution system. Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) was added to the case on January 17. Ranchi court summons Hemant Soren for disobeying ED notices in land grab case A court in Ranchi has summoned incarcerated former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren next month holding him prima facie guilty of disobeying notices issued to him by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering probe linked to an alleged land grab case. The agency had filed a complaint against the senior Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader sometime back, saying he had failed to join the investigation under seven summonses issued to him, the first being on August 14 last year. He should be prosecuted under the Indian Penal Code’s section 174 (non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has said in its complaint. Soren was arrested by the ED on January 31 on money laundering charges following a second round of questioning at his official residence in Ranchi. He resigned as the chief minister before he was arrested. The 48-year-old JMM leader is under judicial custody at present. “From the contents of the complainant (ED) and the material placed on record, prima facie offence under section 174 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is made out and there are sufficient grounds for proceedings under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against accused Hemant Soren,” the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Krishna Kant Mishra said in its order issued on Monday. “Office is directed to issue summons for appearance of accused person,” the court said and fixed April 3 as the date of appearance of Soren before it. Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) pertains to the powers of a magistrate to issue summons or warrant for the attendance of an accused. A similar complaint has been filed by the ED against Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal before a Delhi court for allegedly disobeying the agency’s summons three times. The matter is listed for next hearing on March 16. Eight summons have been issued to Kejriwal till now and he has not deposed, calling these notices illegal. He has last told the ED to question him over a video-conferencing platform. In its complaint against Soren, the ED has accused that he “intentionally omitted to obey the summons and to attend at the place and time mentioned in the summons”, leading to non-compliance of the summonses issued by the investigation officer under Section 50(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The money laundering investigation against Soren relates to an alleged fraudulent acquisition of 8.5 acres land in Ranchi by him, apart from “several other properties linked to him”. Paytm Payments Bank accounts were used by syndicate linked to a foreign State that cheated lakhs of Indians: FIU “Extensive illegal activity” perpetrated by multiple businesses managed by “a syndicate of individuals connected to a foreign state” who cheated lakhs of Indians by offering “fraudulent services including prohibited gambling activities and dating services” was the trigger for the ₹5.49 crore fine imposed on Paytm Payments Bank Limited (PPBL) by India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) last week. The matter first came to light over two years ago with the Cyber Crime Station of Hyderabad lodging First Information Reports (FIRs) under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Telangana State Gambling Act. The FIRs flagged certain business entities and their network of businesses engaging in a number of illegal acts such as organising and assisting online gambling, routing the proceeds of such criminal activities through bank accounts they maintained with the payments bank. The FIU, as per a summary of its March 1 order against PPBL, said the inception of its probe into the troubled payments bank stemmed from law enforcement agencies “identification” of this illegal activity. As part of the FIU’s mandate to ensure effective implementation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), it regularly examines compliance levels of reporting entities like PPBL in the wake of any criminal conduct or fraud coming to light. “In the course of such investigation, certain entities were found to have cheated lakhs of Indians through the offering of fraudulent services including prohibited gambling activities, dating services, and streaming. The proceeds of these fraudulent activities were subsequently remitted abroad,” the FIU noted. The agency added that it also came to light that several of the involved entities had used payment intermediaries to implement their fraudulent designs within India. Based on the bank’s responses to its show-cause notices, the FIU concluded that it had violated the law by failing to exercise ongoing due diligence with reference to the accounts of 34 beneficiaries and failed to file suspicious transaction reports in respect of those accounts. The agency also listed out payout-related charges against the bank, which included its failure to put an internal mechanism in place to detect and report suspicious transactions in the manner prescribed under the PMLA and PML rules. The bank also failed to “satisfy the requirements with respect to reliance on third-party KYC [Know Your Customer] by relying on a non-compliant/unregulated entity in violation of Section 12 of PMLA read with Rule 9(2)(c) and Rule 9(2)(f)”, as per the FIU order summary. It also hauled up PPBL for failing to “exercise ongoing due diligence with respect to its payout service and accounts of entities in question...” The order refers to “extensive illegal activity conducted by multiple businesses under the syndicate of individuals connected to a foreign state” but does not indicate which foreign state was involved. In Brief Ukraine claimed on March 5 it has sunk another Russian warship in the Black Sea using high-tech sea drones as Kyiv’s forces continue to take aim at targets deep behind the war’s front line. Russian authorities did not confirm the claim. The Ukrainian military intelligence agency said a special operations unit destroyed the large patrol ship Sergey Kotov overnight. The ship, which Ukraine said was commissioned in 2021 and was hit near the Kerch Strait, reportedly can carry cruise missiles and around 60 crew. The sinking of such a modern ship would be a significant loss and an embarrassing blow for Moscow, even though there are dozens of other vessels in its Black Sea fleet. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 05 March 2024 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Bombay High Court acquits former Delhi University professor G.N. Saibaba and five others in Maoist link case; Maharashtra govt moves SC against verdict [The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court on Tuesday acquitted former Delhi University professor G.N. Saibaba, 55, and five others arrested in an alleged Maoist link case under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).]( A Division Bench of Justices Vinay Joshi and Valmiki S.A. Menezes pronounced the judgment and acquitted all the accused as the prosecution could not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against them. The appeal for rehearing the case was filed by Saibaba, Mahesh Tirki, Hem Mishra, Pandu Narote, Vijay Tirki and Prashant Rahi, who were sentenced to life imprisonment. The Bench reheard the wheelchair-bound professor lodged in Nagpur Central Jail, and pronounced the verdict. In October, 2022, a High Court Bench too had acquitted the professor. In March 2017, a sessions court in Gadchiroli had convicted Saibaba and the five others for alleged Maoist links and for indulging in activities amounting to waging war against the country. In the sessions court hearing, Saibaba along with two other accused had denied the allegations of possessing naxal literature for circulating among underground naxlites and the residents of Gadchiroli district to incite the people to resort to violence. Based on the charges of Section 45(1) of the UAPA by the Sessions Court, Saibaba had then appealed the Bombay High Court where a Bench led by former High Court Justice Rohit B. Deo too acquitted him and the five others. In the judgment, the High Court said, “While terrorism poses an ominous threat to national security and every legitimate weapon in the armoury must be deployed against it, a civil democracy cannot sacrifice procedural safeguards afforded to the accused.” [The Maharashtra government has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Bombay High Court verdict.]( Supreme Court dismisses money-laundering case against Karnataka Deputy CM Shivakumar The [Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the proceedings instituted by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) against Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister and Congress president D.K. Shivakumar]( under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on the basis of an Income Tax department complaint in 2018. The complaint was filed following searches on the premises of Shivakumar and his associates in Bengaluru and outside the city. The I-T department had alleged that Shivakumar, who ran business concerns, “hatched a criminal conspiracy and engaged different people for the purpose of concealing unaccounted money and projecting it as untainted property” to evade income tax. Shivakumar had maintained that the case was motivated by political reasons. A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and K.V. Viswanathan passed the order on Tuesday on the basis of special leave petitions filed by Shivakumar and two others, variously represented by senior advocates A.M. Singhvi, Siddharth Luthra, S. Nagamuthu and advocate Parmatma Singh, challenging the jurisdiction of the Central agency. They had appealed to the top court against a Karnataka High Court judgment in August 2019 refusing to intervene in the case and upholding the summons issued by the ED. However, the Supreme Court issued notice on October 15, 2019, and directed the ED to not take any coercive action against Shivakumar, Anjaneya Hanumanthaiah, and Sunil Kumar Sharma. Shivakumar had argued that the ED had commenced “illegal proceedings” by registering an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against him under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The senior lawyers contended that the ED strayed far from its turf by basing its ECIR entirely on an Income Tax department complaint alleging tax and penalty offences. None of the offences were ‘scheduled offences’ under the PMLA, the petitioners said. “The admitted basis of commencing investigations under PMLA is a criminal complaint filed by Income Tax authorities, which alleged ‘criminal conspiracy’ punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code only for alleged commission of such offences punishable under the Income Tax Act and the Code,” Shivakumar’s petition underscored. Shivakumar had argued that with no scheduled offence alleged, there were no proceeds of crime. Evidence of crime proceeds was necessary to invoke money-laundering charges. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court referred to its recent Pavana Dibbur judgment, which had held that Section 120B would be deemed a scheduled offence under the PMLA only if the conspiracy had been directed towards the commission of an offence specified in the 2002 Act. “To invoke PMLA, the first requisite is commission or conspiracy to commit a scheduled offence resulting in the proceeds of crime. For invoking Section 3 of the PMLA against any person, it is necessary that a person must not only be involved in an activity connected with the proceeds of crime, but must also project or claim the proceeds of crime as untainted property,” Shivakumar’s plea said. Shivakumar had argued that even the Income Tax proceedings had been separately stayed by the Karnataka High Court in 2019. The prosecution complaint filed by the Income Tax department before the Special Court for Economic Offences was based on searches conducted in the premises of Shivakumar and his associates in different places in Bengaluru and outside the city. The complaint said that “during the search, certain incriminating documents and materials were found and seized”. It said Shivakumar had “active business concerns in the sectors of education, trust and real estate for a significant amount of time. In the course of conducting the business activities, there has been a modus operandi employed by him to engage different people for the purpose of concealing and projecting the unaccounted and illegal money as untainted property for the purpose of evading income tax. It was in this background that a criminal conspiracy to evade income tax and to enable the accused [Shivakumar] to evade income tax was hatched”. Sandeshkhali case | Calcutta High Court transfers probe into attack on ED officers to CBI The [Calcutta High Court on Tuesday ordered the transfer of the probe into an attack on Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials at Sandeshkhali on January 5 from the West Bengal Police to the Central Bureau of Investigation]( (CBI). A Division Bench of T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya also directed that the custody of suspended Trinamool Congress leader Sheikh Shahjahan shall also forthwith be handed over to the CBI, and that order shall be implemented by 4.30 p.m. on Tuesday. The West Bengal Police, however, did not hand over Sheikh Shahjahan to the CBI as directed by the Calcutta High Court order. A team of officials of the CBI visited Bhawani Bhawan, the headquarters of West Bengal Police where the accused has been lodged, but they had to return empty-handed. In an oral mention before Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, the West Bengal government urged for an early hearing of its appeal against the High Court order to hand over the case to the central agency. The CJI asked the State government, represented by senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, to approach the Supreme Court Registrar concerned with the listing of cases. Sheikh Shahjahan was arrested by the West Bengal Police on February 29 after villagers, particularly women in Sandeshkhali, held protests for days demanding his arrest. The allegations of sexual assault and land grab by Sheikh Shahjahan and his aides had triggered an outrage in the political circles. Earlier, a Single Bench of Calcutta High Court had on January 17 set up an SIT comprising officials of West Bengal Police and the CBI to probe the attack on ED officials and the Division Bench had stayed the order at the prayer of ED. “In the result, MAT no. 169 of 2024 and MAT no. 191 of 2024 are allowed, and the order passed by the learned Single Bench constituting the Special Investigating Team is set aside, and the writ petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate in WPA 802 of 2024 is allowed, and cases in FIR No. 8 of 2024 and FIR No. 9 of 2024 on the file of the Nazat Police Station and FIR 18 of 2024 on the file of the Bongaon Police Station shall forthwith be transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation,” the Division Bench said in the order. The court noted that Sheikh Shahjahan, who was arrested after being on the run for more than 50 days, is not an ordinary citizen, and it has become necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights of the public that the cases be transferred to the CBI. “He is an elected representative of the public, holding the highest office in a Zilla Parishad, he was fielded as the candidate at the elections held for the said post by the political party which is ruling dispensation. Thus, it has become imperative and absolutely necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights of the public in general and the public of the locality that the cases be transferred to the CBI for investigation,” the order said. The Division Bench also took note of the impugned order of a Single Bench where it has observed that the suo motu FIR – the FIR No. 8 of 2024 – did not contain relevant provisions of the law and presented a rather watered-down version. The ED raid on the residence of Sheikh Shahjahan on January 5 was in connection with the public distribution system. Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) was added to the case on January 17. Ranchi court summons Hemant Soren for disobeying ED notices in land grab case [A court in Ranchi has summoned incarcerated former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren next month holding him prima facie guilty of disobeying notices issued to him by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering probe linked to an alleged land grab case.]( The agency had filed a complaint against the senior Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader sometime back, saying he had failed to join the investigation under seven summonses issued to him, the first being on August 14 last year. He should be prosecuted under the Indian Penal Code’s section 174 (non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has said in its complaint. Soren was arrested by the ED on January 31 on money laundering charges following a second round of questioning at his official residence in Ranchi. He resigned as the chief minister before he was arrested. The 48-year-old JMM leader is under judicial custody at present. “From the contents of the complainant (ED) and the material placed on record, prima facie offence under section 174 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is made out and there are sufficient grounds for proceedings under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against accused Hemant Soren,” the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Krishna Kant Mishra said in its order issued on Monday. “Office is directed to issue summons for appearance of accused person,” the court said and fixed April 3 as the date of appearance of Soren before it. Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) pertains to the powers of a magistrate to issue summons or warrant for the attendance of an accused. A similar complaint has been filed by the ED against Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal before a Delhi court for allegedly disobeying the agency’s summons three times. The matter is listed for next hearing on March 16. Eight summons have been issued to Kejriwal till now and he has not deposed, calling these notices illegal. He has last told the ED to question him over a video-conferencing platform. In its complaint against Soren, the ED has accused that he “intentionally omitted to obey the summons and to attend at the place and time mentioned in the summons”, leading to non-compliance of the summonses issued by the investigation officer under Section 50(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The money laundering investigation against Soren relates to an alleged fraudulent acquisition of 8.5 acres land in Ranchi by him, apart from “several other properties linked to him”. Paytm Payments Bank accounts were used by syndicate linked to a foreign State that cheated lakhs of Indians: FIU [“Extensive illegal activity” perpetrated by multiple businesses managed by “a syndicate of individuals connected to a foreign state” who cheated lakhs of Indians by offering “fraudulent services including prohibited gambling activities and dating services” was the trigger for the ₹5.49 crore fine imposed on Paytm Payments Bank Limited (PPBL) by India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) last week.]( The matter first came to light over two years ago with the Cyber Crime Station of Hyderabad lodging First Information Reports (FIRs) under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Telangana State Gambling Act. The FIRs flagged certain business entities and their network of businesses engaging in a number of illegal acts such as organising and assisting online gambling, routing the proceeds of such criminal activities through bank accounts they maintained with the payments bank. The FIU, as per a summary of its March 1 order against PPBL, said the inception of its probe into the troubled payments bank stemmed from law enforcement agencies “identification” of this illegal activity. As part of the FIU’s mandate to ensure effective implementation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), it regularly examines compliance levels of reporting entities like PPBL in the wake of any criminal conduct or fraud coming to light. “In the course of such investigation, certain entities were found to have cheated lakhs of Indians through the offering of fraudulent services including prohibited gambling activities, dating services, and streaming. The proceeds of these fraudulent activities were subsequently remitted abroad,” the FIU noted. The agency added that it also came to light that several of the involved entities had used payment intermediaries to implement their fraudulent designs within India. Based on the bank’s responses to its show-cause notices, the FIU concluded that it had violated the law by failing to exercise ongoing due diligence with reference to the accounts of 34 beneficiaries and failed to file suspicious transaction reports in respect of those accounts. The agency also listed out payout-related charges against the bank, which included its failure to put an internal mechanism in place to detect and report suspicious transactions in the manner prescribed under the PMLA and PML rules. The bank also failed to “satisfy the requirements with respect to reliance on third-party KYC [Know Your Customer] by relying on a non-compliant/unregulated entity in violation of Section 12 of PMLA read with Rule 9(2)(c) and Rule 9(2)(f)”, as per the FIU order summary. It also hauled up PPBL for failing to “exercise ongoing due diligence with respect to its payout service and accounts of entities in question...” The order refers to “extensive illegal activity conducted by multiple businesses under the syndicate of individuals connected to a foreign state” but does not indicate which foreign state was involved. In Brief [Ukraine claimed on March 5 it has sunk another Russian warship in the Black Sea]( using high-tech sea drones as Kyiv’s forces continue to take aim at targets deep behind the war’s front line. Russian authorities did not confirm the claim. The Ukrainian military intelligence agency said a special operations unit destroyed the large patrol ship Sergey Kotov overnight. The ship, which Ukraine said was commissioned in 2021 and was hit near the Kerch Strait, reportedly can carry cruise missiles and around 60 crew. The sinking of such a modern ship would be a significant loss and an embarrassing blow for Moscow, even though there are dozens of other vessels in its Black Sea fleet. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [Sign up for free]( Today’s Top Picks [[Cross-voting and defections in Indian politics | In Focus podcast] Cross-voting and defections in Indian politics | In Focus podcast]( [[Daily Quiz | On Antonio Vivaldi] Daily Quiz | On Antonio Vivaldi]( [[What ended the ‘dark ages’ in the early universe? Webb telescope finds clue] What ended the ‘dark ages’ in the early universe? Webb telescope finds clue]( [[The latest talks on Gaza have ended with no breakthrough, officials say] The latest talks on Gaza have ended with no breakthrough, officials say]( Copyright© 2024, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [click here]( Manage your newsletter subscription preferences [here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](