https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196512 The court discharged accused Nos. 1 to 3 from charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, ruling that the Act cannot be applied retroactively to incidents pre-2009 when the alleged offenses occurred. The court emphasized the need for prospective application of criminal liability and highlighted the absence of satisfactory explanations for the delay in invoking the Money Laundering Act against the accused. The court found that the allegations in both the corruption and money laundering cases were identical, supporting the discharge of the accused from the money laundering charges. en-us Thu, 14 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 03 Dec 2017 10:01:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196512 The court discharged accused Nos. 1 to 3 from charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, ruling that the Act cannot be applied retroactively to incidents pre-2009 when the alleged offenses occurred. The court emphasized the need for prospective application of criminal liability and highlighted the absence of satisfactory explanations for the delay in invoking the Money Laundering Act against the accused. The court found that the allegations in both the corruption and money laundering cases were identical, supporting the discharge of the accused from the money laundering charges. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 14 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196512