https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388004 The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was described as a complete code for money-laundering investigation and prosecution, operating only where a scheduled offence is already registered. In the absence of an FIR for the predicate offence, the Enforcement Directorate had no basis to initiate proceedings, and the Act provides no power equivalent to Section 156(3) CrPC for a private complainant to compel registration of an ECIR or FIR. Cognizance under Sections 44 and 45 lies only on complaint by the authorised statutory authority. The petition was also treated as territorially barred because the alleged and subject matter were connected to Gurugram, Haryana, and the challenge was dismissed. en-us Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2019 10:17:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388004 The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was described as a complete code for money-laundering investigation and prosecution, operating only where a scheduled offence is already registered. In the absence of an FIR for the predicate offence, the Enforcement Directorate had no basis to initiate proceedings, and the Act provides no power equivalent to Section 156(3) CrPC for a private complainant to compel registration of an ECIR or FIR. Cognizance under Sections 44 and 45 lies only on complaint by the authorised statutory authority. The petition was also treated as territorially barred because the alleged and subject matter were connected to Gurugram, Haryana, and the challenge was dismissed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388004