Skip to content

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

Meera acquired property out of proceeds of crime in 2016 and has continued to hold and enjoy it ever since. In 2026 she is charged under Section 3. Her defence is that the acquisition happened long ago. Which statement is correct as per the Explanation to Section 3?

The defence fails. The Explanation to Section 3 says that the process connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity. It continues until the person stops directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds through possession, use, concealment or claiming them as untainted, so the 2016 acquisition date does not help Meera.

  1. AThe defence succeeds because acquisition was a one-time act completed in 2016
  2. BThe defence fails because the process is a continuing activity that lasts as long as the person directly or indirectly enjoys the proceeds by possession, use or similar meansCorrect
  3. CThe defence succeeds because only concealment is a continuing activity
  4. DThe defence fails only if she is also convicted of the scheduled offence

Explanation

The Explanation states that the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is continuing and continues until the person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds by concealment, possession, acquisition, use, or projecting or claiming them as untainted. Option A treats acquisition as one-off, which the Explanation rejects.

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.

More Prevention of Money Laundering questions