Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with offences under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002.
Analysis: The petition was considered in the context of an earlier corruption investigation in which the petitioners had not been arrested during investigation and had not been subjected to custodial interrogation even after the money-laundering investigation commenced. The Court noted that the investigation had substantially progressed, that the petitioners had been attending the investigation when required, and that custodial interrogation was not shown to be necessary at that stage. The Court also referred to the presumption of innocence and the constitutional protection against self-incrimination, and found the cited authorities on serious economic offences distinguishable on the facts.
Conclusion: The petitioners were held entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to conditions.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the investigation has substantially progressed and custodial interrogation is not shown to be necessary, anticipatory bail may be granted notwithstanding allegations under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, particularly where the accused has cooperated with investigation.