<?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 (6) TMI 424 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408528</link>
    <description>The article examines regular bail in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, focusing on the effect of Section 45, its proviso, and the post-amendment bail framework. It discusses the relevance of the earlier striking down of the twin conditions, the statutory burden under Section 24, and the character of the alleged proceeds of crime, including the distinction between amounts linked to government agencies and private transactions. It also notes that documentary material was already collected, further custodial interrogation was said to be unnecessary, and there was no serious material showing flight risk, tampering with evidence, or witness influence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Oct 2024 17:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=646696" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 424 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408528</link>
      <description>The article examines regular bail in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, focusing on the effect of Section 45, its proviso, and the post-amendment bail framework. It discusses the relevance of the earlier striking down of the twin conditions, the statutory burden under Section 24, and the character of the alleged proceeds of crime, including the distinction between amounts linked to government agencies and private transactions. It also notes that documentary material was already collected, further custodial interrogation was said to be unnecessary, and there was no serious material showing flight risk, tampering with evidence, or witness influence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408528</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>