As per case facts, the Applicant filed a Criminal Application to quash a Designated Court's order that issued process against him in a PMLA Special Case. The original FIR pertained ... to offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC during 2020-2021, leading to a PMLA complaint where the Applicant was Accused No. 11. The prosecution alleged proceeds of crime were generated between late 2020 and early 2021, and that the Applicant, as a director, facilitated transactions for a company that purchased properties between 2005-2007 using tainted funds. The Applicant contended these properties were acquired long before the alleged crime period. The question arose whether properties acquired significantly before the generation of proceeds of crime can be considered "proceeds of crime" and if the Designated Court's order to proceed against the Applicant, lacking specific reasoning, was valid. Finally, the Court ruled that the properties purchased in 2005-2007 could not be linked to proceeds of crime generated in 2020-2021, as the criminal activity occurred after acquisition. The material on record did not establish a PMLA offense against the Applicant, and the Designated Court's order failed to demonstrate application of mind, thus not meeting the "sufficient ground for proceeding" test. Consequently, the impugned order and the complaint against the Applicant were quashed.