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 anticipatory bail should be granted in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, having regard to the statutory restrictions on bail, the seriousness of the allegation, and the applicant's contention that the case did not satisfy the requirements of the Act.
Analysis: The application was examined in the context of the special scheme of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which has overriding effect over the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 45 was treated as mandatory, requiring satisfaction of the twin conditions before bail could be granted. The seriousness of economic offences, the nature of money-laundering allegations, and the principles governing anticipatory bail in exceptional cases were considered. The Court found that the statutory conditions were not satisfied and that no ground was made out for pre-arrest bail.
Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was refused; the application was held not maintainable on merits for grant of relief.
Final Conclusion: In a prosecution under the special anti-money-laundering regime, pre-arrest bail will not be granted unless the statutory safeguards are met and the Court is satisfied that the case warrants that extraordinary relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute imposes mandatory bail restrictions with an overriding clause, anticipatory bail cannot be granted unless the statutory preconditions are affirmatively satisfied.