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 arrest of the petitioner and the consequent remand order were illegal or arbitrary, including for alleged non-compliance with the requirements of Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the principles in Pankaj Bansal. (ii) Whether the petitioner was entitled to release from custody on the ground that the arrest and remand were invalid.
Issue (i): Whether the arrest of the petitioner and the consequent remand order were illegal or arbitrary, including for alleged non-compliance with the requirements of Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the principles in Pankaj Bansal.
Analysis: The arrest was tested against the statutory safeguards under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, namely possession of material, formation of reason to believe, recording of reasons in writing, and communication of grounds of arrest. The record was found to contain witness statements, approver statements, digital and corroborative material, and material indicating the petitioner's alleged role in the excise policy, demand of kickbacks, and use of proceeds of crime in election expenditure. Written grounds of arrest were supplied, the remand court examined the material and recorded satisfaction as to compliance, and the petitioner's repeated non-appearance despite multiple summons under Section 50 was treated as a relevant contributory circumstance. The challenge to the credibility of approvers and witnesses was held to be a matter for trial and not for a mini-trial in writ jurisdiction.
Conclusion: The arrest and the remand order were held valid and not contrary to the law laid down in Pankaj Bansal.
Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to release from custody on the ground that the arrest and remand were invalid.
Analysis: Since the arrest was held lawful and the remand order was found to suffer from no infirmity, the prayer for release could not survive. The Court also held that the custody challenge could not succeed on the basis of timing of arrest, political status, or asserted entitlement to special investigative treatment, and that the petitioner's continued custody followed valid judicial orders.
Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to release from custody on the ground urged.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed on both the legality of arrest and the validity of remand, leaving the petitioner's custody undisturbed and the investigation to continue in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: An arrest under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is valid where the authorised officer has material in possession, records reasons to believe in writing, and communicates the grounds of arrest, and a remand order will stand if the court verifies such compliance and applies judicial mind to the material produced.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
