Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court opined that since Enforcement Case Investigation Report (‘ECIR’) is not a condition precedent for starting an investigation or inquiry by the Enforcement Directorate and is only an internal record of the department, its quashing would serve no purpose whatsoever.
“It was also alleged that illegal kidney transplantation was the only occupation of the petitioner, and his entire earnings were from this source only.”
“The Court, recognizing the significant delay in trial commencement and the uncertainty around its duration, granted bail to the accused and also extended the benefit of the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA.”
“The Court also held that it is not necessary that a person against whom the offence under Section 3 of the PMLA is alleged, must be shown as the accused in the scheduled offence.”
The Court also considered the fact that the accused is a permanent resident of his locality, having his family members and ancestral property, hence, there is no scope of absconding if the accused person is granted bail.
“It is revealed during the investigation by Enforcement Directorate that the applicant is the brother and a close associate of the mastermind behind the present illegal coal levy scam and, is having strong links with politicians and businessmen in Chhattisgarh.”
Explaining the scope of the territorial jurisdiction of Special Court under the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002, the bench of V Ramasubramanian and JB Pardiwala, JJ also held that the trial of the scheduled offence should follow the trial of the offence of money-laundering and not vice versa.
The Delhi High Court held that grant of bail should not be considered only when the person was in the condition of dying and the authorities should not give long dates to the prisoners for their medical check-up and instead act with promptness, so that check-up could be conducted early.
Patiala House Court (New Delhi): In a bail application plea under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
by Swarnendu Chatterjee†
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 66
Supreme Court: As Congress MP Karti P. Chidambaram has sought review of the 3-judge bench verdict on the Prevention of Money Laundering
Advocates Act, 1961 — S. 16 — Procedure for designation of Senior Advocates: Clarification of Guidelines prescribed for Supreme Court
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of AM Khanwilkar*, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar, JJ has, in 545-pages-long judgments, has dealt with various
1. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”) was brought into force with effect from 1st July 2005. Necessary Notifications /
Appellate Tribunal for SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS & PBPT Act: Justice Manmohan Singh (Chairman), dismissed an appeal filed by a company challenging
Appellate Tribunal for SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS & PBPT Act: A Coram of Manmohan Singh (Chairman), J. and G.C. Mishra (Member) set
Appellate Tribunal for SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS & PBPT Act: The coram of Manmohan Singh, J. (Chairman) and G.C. Mishra (Member) ordered