Post-complaint interrogation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act remains permissible for recording Section 50 statements.

After filing of a complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the accused may still be called for interrogation for recording statements under Section 50 because Explanation (ii) to Section 44(1) expressly permits the investigating agency to adopt that course. The contrary view in the impugned judgment was rejected for overlooking this express statutory provision, and the document states that post-complaint interrogation remains permissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after filing of the complaint, the accused can be called for interrogation for recording statements under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: The explanation (ii) to Section 44(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 specifically permits such a course to be adopted by the investigating agency. The contrary view taken in the impugned judgment did not account for this express provision.

Conclusion: The accused can be called for interrogation after filing of the complaint for recording statements under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

---