<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (10) TMI 200 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399226</link>
    <description>Bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was considered on allegations of disproportionate assets and laundering through fixed deposits and other deposits. The Court treated the accusations against the main accused as involving serious disputes over the explanation for gold, diamonds and agricultural income, and regarded the matter as an economic offence of gravity; bail was refused to the main accused petitioner. For the co-accused petitioners, there was no specific allegation beyond their relationship with the main accused, custodial interrogation was no longer necessary, and bail was granted on an individual assessment balancing liberty and trial requirements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2020 10:50:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=624278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 200 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399226</link>
      <description>Bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was considered on allegations of disproportionate assets and laundering through fixed deposits and other deposits. The Court treated the accusations against the main accused as involving serious disputes over the explanation for gold, diamonds and agricultural income, and regarded the matter as an economic offence of gravity; bail was refused to the main accused petitioner. For the co-accused petitioners, there was no specific allegation beyond their relationship with the main accused, custodial interrogation was no longer necessary, and bail was granted on an individual assessment balancing liberty and trial requirements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399226</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>