Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Regular bail denied in money laundering case under Section 45(1) PMLA for cattle smuggling proceeds</h1> <h3>Mohd Enamul Haque Through His Pairokar Abdul Hannan Versus Directorate of Enforcement Through Assistant Director</h3> Mohd Enamul Haque Through His Pairokar Abdul Hannan Versus Directorate of Enforcement Through Assistant Director - 2024:DHC:5545 Issues Involved:1. Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.2. Allegations of money laundering under PMLA.3. Connection between the applicant and the proceeds of crime (PoC).4. Admissibility of evidence, including diary entries and statements under Section 50 of PMLA.5. Applicant's medical condition and its impact on bail consideration.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Bail Application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.:The applicant sought regular bail in connection with a case registered by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The application was filed through his brother and pairokar Abdul Hannan.2. Allegations of Money Laundering under PMLA:The prosecution alleged that the applicant, along with others, was involved in illegal activities related to cattle smuggling, which generated and acquired PoC. The applicant allegedly deposited around Rs. 12.8 Crores in the joint bank account of Badal Krishna Sanyal and Tania Sanyal through his employee Manoj Sana as a bribe to Satish Kumar, a Commandant in BSF, for providing protection in cattle smuggling. Additionally, Rs. 6.1 Crores were allegedly paid to Vinay Mishra and his brother Vikas Mishra through Manoj Sana in cash on different occasions.3. Connection between the Applicant and the Proceeds of Crime (PoC):The ED's case was based on the diary entries of Manoj Sana, which were corroborated by cash deposit slips. The investigation revealed that these funds were PoC generated from cattle smuggling and laundered through various transactions and shell companies. The applicant's companies, such as HMPL and HIPL, showed exponential growth in turnover, which was allegedly due to the illegal proceeds from cattle smuggling. The funds were used to purchase properties, including a property in CR Park, New Delhi.4. Admissibility of Evidence:The applicant contested the admissibility of the diary entries and statements under Section 50 of PMLA. The court noted that the diary was maintained by Manoj Sana in the ordinary course of business and was recovered from his possession, thus presuming its authenticity under Section 22 of PMLA. The statements under Section 50 of PMLA were considered admissible and could form a formidable case against the applicant.5. Applicant's Medical Condition:The applicant claimed to suffer from various medical ailments and sought bail under the Proviso to Section 45 of PMLA, which provides exceptions for sick or infirm individuals. However, the court found that the medical issues raised could be treated in the jail hospital or referral hospitals and did not warrant the benefit of the proviso.Analysis and Findings:The court emphasized the importance of Article 21 of the Constitution, guaranteeing the right to personal liberty, but also noted the need to balance this with the larger interest of society. The court referred to various judgments highlighting the gravity of economic offences and the stringent conditions under Section 45 of PMLA for granting bail. The court found prima facie sufficient material to show the applicant's involvement in the alleged offence of money laundering and the connection of the monies involved to the predicate offence as PoC. The court also noted that the applicant had failed to satisfy the twin conditions under Section 45 (1) of PMLA, which require showing that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.Conclusion:The bail application was dismissed, and the court found that the applicant had not met the threshold of the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA. The court also rejected the argument that the applicant's medical conditions warranted bail, as these could be treated within the jail facilities.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found