Skip to content

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Prevention of Money Laundering

Kavita is charged under Section 3 with money-laundering. In the trial, how must the Court treat the question whether the proceeds of crime are involved in money-laundering?

The Court shall presume that the proceeds of crime are involved in money-laundering unless the accused proves the contrary. This mandatory presumption applies to a person charged under Section 3, whereas for any other person the Authority or Court only may presume.

  1. AIt may presume involvement, at its discretion, and the prosecution must always prove it independently
  2. BIt shall presume involvement unless the contrary is provedCorrect
  3. CIt must presume that no money-laundering occurred until the agency proves otherwise beyond doubt
  4. DNo presumption arises in criminal trials under the Act

Explanation

Section 24(a) says that for a person charged under section 3, the Authority or Court shall, unless the contrary is proved, presume the proceeds are involved in money-laundering. The discretionary 'may presume' applies to other persons under clause (b), so the first option is wrong.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Prevention of Money Laundering shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Prevention of Money LaunderingFree diagnostic mock

More Prevention of Money Laundering questions