Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Accused Denied Bail under PMLA Section 45 Due to Economic Offence Severity

        Directorate of Enforcement Versus Amarendra Dhari Singh

        Directorate of Enforcement Versus Amarendra Dhari Singh - TMI Issues Involved:
        1. Applicability of twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for bail.
        2. Consideration of bail based on general provisions if twin conditions are deemed inapplicable.
        3. Bail under proviso to Section 45 of PMLA due to the accused's health condition.
        4. Accusations against the accused and the severity of the alleged economic offence.
        5. Risk of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses.
        6. Stage of investigation and its impact on bail decision.

        Detailed Analysis:

        1. Applicability of Twin Conditions under Section 45 of PMLA:
        The primary issue addressed was whether the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA should be applied in this case. The court noted that the Supreme Court in *Nikesh Tarachand Shah vs. Union of India* had declared the twin conditions unconstitutional. However, post-amendment, Section 45 of PMLA now applies these conditions to every offence under PMLA. Despite divergent views from various High Courts, the Supreme Court has stayed judgments that found the twin conditions inapplicable. Therefore, the court concluded that the twin conditions must be applied in this case.

        2. Consideration of Bail Based on General Provisions:
        Even if the twin conditions were not applied, the court considered the general provisions governing bail. The court emphasized factors such as the nature of the accusation, severity of the offence, risk of tampering with evidence, and likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice. Given the gravity of the allegations involving money laundering of around Rs. 685 crores, the court found the accusations serious enough to deny bail.

        3. Bail under Proviso to Section 45 of PMLA Due to Health Condition:
        The accused sought bail under the proviso to Section 45 of PMLA, citing his health conditions, including lymphatic cancer and heart ailments. The court examined medical records and found that the malignancy was controlled and no serious cardiac issues required constant medical supervision. The accused's frequent foreign travels for health, business, and leisure further indicated that his health conditions were manageable. Thus, the court concluded that the accused did not qualify for bail under the proviso for being sick and infirm.

        4. Accusations Against the Accused and Severity of the Alleged Economic Offence:
        The court detailed the allegations, including the fraudulent import of fertilizers at inflated prices, illegal commission transfers, and money laundering through a complex web of companies. The accused was implicated in channeling illegal funds and causing significant loss to the public exchequer. The court highlighted the Supreme Court's stance that economic offences should be viewed seriously due to their impact on the economy.

        5. Risk of Tampering with Evidence and Influencing Witnesses:
        Given the accused's influential position as a Rajya Sabha MP and a member of the Parliamentary Standing Committee of Fertilizers, the court found a reasonable apprehension that he could tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. Statements from witnesses and the ongoing investigation supported this concern.

        6. Stage of Investigation and Its Impact on Bail Decision:
        The investigation was at an initial stage, focusing on identifying the proceeds of crime and tracing the money trail. The court emphasized that releasing the accused on bail could hamper the investigation, given the complexity of money laundering cases involving multiple entities and jurisdictions.

        Conclusion:
        The court dismissed the bail application, applying the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA and considering the serious nature of the economic offence, potential for tampering with evidence, and the initial stage of the investigation. The accused's health conditions were deemed manageable, and his influential position posed a risk to the integrity of the investigation.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found