<?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>2021 (5) TMI 189 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407310</link>
    <description>Under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the grounds of arrest must be furnished in writing and oral intimation alone is insufficient, ensuring meaningful notice of the basis of arrest. The phrase requiring a &quot;reason to believe&quot; does not demand a judicial or trial-like adjudication of guilt; the arresting officer must instead form an objective, material-based satisfaction that arrest is warranted. That satisfaction must be reflected in the written grounds of arrest with enough detail to disclose the basis for the belief, though no detailed adjudicatory order is required. The arrest was upheld as compliant with these requirements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 May 2021 08:41:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=643611" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 189 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407310</link>
      <description>Under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the grounds of arrest must be furnished in writing and oral intimation alone is insufficient, ensuring meaningful notice of the basis of arrest. The phrase requiring a &quot;reason to believe&quot; does not demand a judicial or trial-like adjudication of guilt; the arresting officer must instead form an objective, material-based satisfaction that arrest is warranted. That satisfaction must be reflected in the written grounds of arrest with enough detail to disclose the basis for the belief, though no detailed adjudicatory order is required. The arrest was upheld as compliant with these requirements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>