SLP dismissed; no anticipatory bail in money laundering case as Section 45(1) PMLA conditions not met. SC dismissed the special leave petition challenging HC's refusal to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused in a money laundering case arising from a ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
SLP dismissed; no anticipatory bail in money laundering case as Section 45(1) PMLA conditions not met.
SC dismissed the special leave petition challenging HC's refusal to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused in a money laundering case arising from a scheduled offence under the PMLA. The Court declined to interfere with the HC's assessment that conditions under Section 45(1) PMLA were not satisfied and that granting anticipatory bail could enable the accused to influence witnesses and obstruct ongoing investigation. Consequently, the denial of pre-arrest bail was affirmed, and the accused remains subject to custodial processes as per law.
The Supreme Court, exercising its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution, declined to interfere with the judgment and order of the High Court. By holding that it was "not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the High Court," the Court effectively affirmed the High Court's decision without entering into a detailed reappraisal of facts or law on record. The special leave petition was accordingly dismissed, thereby leaving the High Court's decision undisturbed and attaining finality between the parties, subject to any other remedies in law. The Court further directed that all pending application(s), if any, stood disposed of as a consequence of the dismissal.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
