TaxTMI Login
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%
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
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, on the materials placed by the prosecution, the applicant satisfied the twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 for grant of bail.
Analysis: The application was examined on the footing that the twin conditions under Section 45 were operative. The decisive question was whether the Enforcement Directorate had prima facie established the foundational facts showing that the applicant was directly or indirectly involved in the process of money laundering and had received proceeds of crime. The Court found that the alleged money trail from the bank account in which the loan amount was said to have been parked to the accounts from which funds reached the applicant was not adequately demonstrated by bank statements or other corroborative material. It further found that several amounts relied upon by the prosecution pre-dated the alleged generation of proceeds of crime, and that the prosecution had not satisfactorily shown placement, layering, or integration linking the applicant to tainted funds. On that basis, the Court held that the prosecution had not prima facie established the foundational facts necessary to attract the rigours of Section 45, and the medical ground did not survive independently in view of the Supreme Court's prior refusal of extension of interim bail on that basis.
Conclusion: The applicant was found entitled to bail as the prosecution did not establish, at the threshold, a prima facie case of involvement in money laundering sufficient to satisfy the statutory embargo under Section 45.
Ratio Decidendi: For bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the prosecution must prima facie establish the foundational money trail connecting the applicant to proceeds of crime and showing involvement in placement, layering, or integration before the twin conditions under Section 45 can be said to be attracted.
TaxTMI 
