https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295747 Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act permits commitment of a scheduled offence to the Special Court only on an application by the authorised authority, and does not give the accused a right to seek transfer of the predicate prosecution merely because a money-laundering complaint is pending. The scheduled-offence trial and the PMLA proceedings remain distinct and independent, so pendency of one does not oust the jurisdiction of the court trying the other. On that basis, the request for adjournment sine die and transfer of the pending criminal case to the Special Court was rejected. en-us Tue, 09 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jun 2021 08:11:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295747 Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act permits commitment of a scheduled offence to the Special Court only on an application by the authorised authority, and does not give the accused a right to seek transfer of the predicate prosecution merely because a money-laundering complaint is pending. The scheduled-offence trial and the PMLA proceedings remain distinct and independent, so pendency of one does not oust the jurisdiction of the court trying the other. On that basis, the request for adjournment sine die and transfer of the pending criminal case to the Special Court was rejected. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 09 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295747