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: Whether the appellant was entitled to bail in the pending money-laundering proceedings.
Analysis: The appellant faced prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Court noted that co-accused had already been granted bail by the High Court or by the Court itself. The Court also took into account the appellant's age and the fact that he had remained in custody for more than two years. In view of these factors, the Court found it appropriate to extend the benefit of bail.
Conclusion: Bail was granted and the impugned order was set aside.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
