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 applicant was entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Analysis: The materials on record indicated that the applicant was running a P.C.O. and computer centre near the university and was actively involved in exchanging original answer booklets with forged answer sheets, printing duplicate bar codes, and preparing forged mark-sheets and admit cards. The record also indicated direct contact with co-accused persons and students, along with substantial cash and digital transfers into the applicant's account, which were not satisfactorily explained. In view of the seriousness of the alleged money laundering activity, the scale of the alleged manipulation of the examination process, and the material collected during investigation, the court found no ground to exercise bail jurisdiction in the applicant's favour.
Conclusion: Bail was refused and the application was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Bail may be declined where the material indicates prima facie participation in a serious economic offence involving laundering of proceeds of crime, large-scale manipulation, and unexplained financial transactions.