https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417811 Attachment confirmed under Section 8(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act continued to operate while criminal proceedings remained pending before the competent court, so the 365-day limitation applicable during investigation did not apply. The pending challenge to the attachment orders also showed that the restraints had not ceased. At the anticipatory bail stage, the Court declined to assess whether the alleged offences were ultimately made out and relied instead on the seriousness of the economic offence, the petitioner's execution of sale deeds despite restraints, and the need for custodial interrogation. Pre-arrest protection was therefore refused. en-us Tue, 07 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Feb 2022 08:44:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417811 Attachment confirmed under Section 8(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act continued to operate while criminal proceedings remained pending before the competent court, so the 365-day limitation applicable during investigation did not apply. The pending challenge to the attachment orders also showed that the restraints had not ceased. At the anticipatory bail stage, the Court declined to assess whether the alleged offences were ultimately made out and relied instead on the seriousness of the economic offence, the petitioner's execution of sale deeds despite restraints, and the need for custodial interrogation. Pre-arrest protection was therefore refused. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 07 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417811