TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the summons issued in purported exercise of powers under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be stayed after filing of complaint and taking of cognizance. (ii) Whether arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be effected at the post-cognizance stage and whether the trial court was bound to accept bail bond and surety bond on appearance under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Issue (i): Whether the summons issued in purported exercise of powers under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be stayed after filing of complaint and taking of cognizance.
Analysis: The request was examined in the context of the post-cognizance stage and the earlier clarification issued by the Court. The summons was not stayed, and the petitioner was directed to appear in response to it.
Conclusion: The prayer to stay operation of the summons was declined.
Issue (ii): Whether arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be effected at the post-cognizance stage and whether the trial court was bound to accept bail bond and surety bond on appearance under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: The Court clarified that on appearance at the post-cognizance stage, the trial court was required to accept the bail bond and surety bond to its satisfaction under Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, without taking the petitioner into custody. It further clarified that arrest under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 did not arise at that stage.
Conclusion: The trial court had to accept bail and surety bonds on appearance, and arrest under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was not available at the post-cognizance stage.
Final Conclusion: The application was rejected in substance, while the Court protected the petitioner's appearance rights by clarifying that custody and arrest were not to be resorted to at the post-cognizance stage.
Ratio Decidendi: After cognizance has been taken, the accused may be required to appear, but the court must accept bail and surety bonds under Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 without custody, and arrest under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not to be made at that stage.
TaxTMI 
