TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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 High Court, while considering anticipatory bail in connection with an offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, was required to apply the mandate of Section 45 of that Act. (ii) Whether the order granting anticipatory bail could be sustained without examining the statutory threshold applicable to a PMLA prosecution.
Issue (i): Whether the High Court, while considering anticipatory bail in connection with an offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, was required to apply the mandate of Section 45 of that Act.
Analysis: The prosecution under the money laundering law is linked to a predicate offence under ordinary penal law, but that connection does not exclude the operation of the special statutory restrictions governing bail in a PMLA case. An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, when made in connection with a PMLA offence, must still be tested on the touchstone of Section 45 of the special enactment. The impugned order proceeded as though the matter involved only an ordinary penal offence and did not advert to this requirement.
Conclusion: The mandate of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had to be considered, and the High Court's failure to do so was erroneous.
Issue (ii): Whether the order granting anticipatory bail could be sustained without examining the statutory threshold applicable to a PMLA prosecution.
Analysis: The absence of an objection before the High Court did not cure the defect, because the court was bound to examine the jurisdictional and statutory requirements governing the prayer for bail. Since the impugned order did not address the special legal regime applicable to PMLA offences, it could not stand and the matter required reconsideration by the High Court afresh on its own merits and in accordance with law.
Conclusion: The order granting anticipatory bail was set aside and the matter was remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration.
Final Conclusion: The special bail restrictions applicable to a PMLA prosecution must be examined even when relief is sought under the Code of Criminal Procedure, and an order passed without such examination is liable to be set aside for reconsideration.
Ratio Decidendi: In a request for anticipatory bail connected with a PMLA offence, the court must apply the statutory conditions governing that special enactment and cannot treat the matter as one under ordinary penal law alone.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
