Unlawful outward remittances via Hawala using proforma invoices and electronic records proved; documents admitted, directors penalised, penalties redu...
Attachment of equivalent-value properties as proceeds of crime upheld; preventive attachment order and confirmation sustained; no independent ED reinv...
Where the documentary evidence attributes the cheque liability to a partnership firm, the statutory scheme requires the firm to be impleaded and served with notice before criminal proceedings against individual partners can proceed; failure to implead the firm and to satisfy those requisites renders prosecution defective and individual conviction unsustainable. The evidential presumption of negotiable-instrument liability is rebuttable; admissions showing firm-related transactions shift the burden back to the complainant to prove a personal, legally enforceable debt, and absence of such proof defeats the prosecution's case.
Where the documentary evidence attributes the cheque liability to a partnership firm, the statutory scheme requires the firm to be impleaded and served with notice before criminal proceedings against individual partners can proceed; failure to implead the firm and to satisfy those requisites renders prosecution defective and individual conviction unsustainable. The evidential presumption of negotiable-instrument liability is rebuttable; admissions showing firm-related transactions shift the burden back to the complainant to prove a personal, legally enforceable debt, and absence of such proof defeats the prosecution's case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.