Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The HC dismissed the petition and refused to quash proceedings against the petitioner, arrayed as the third accused, holding that prima facie material establishes possession of alleged proceeds of crime and sufficient inference of knowledge/mens rea under Section 3 of the PML Act, 2002. The Court ruled determination of actual possession, mens rea and use of tainted funds for any second acquisition is evidentiary and for trial; quashing at pre-trial was inappropriate. The Court observed that absence as an accused in the predicate complaint does not preclude prosecution under the PML Act or automatic quashment, and that ongoing possession post-registration supports continuation of prosecution. The Criminal Miscellaneous Case was dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
