https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436386 Territorial jurisdiction for a PMLA prosecution complaint depends on where the alleged money-laundering activity occurred, not where the scheduled offence was registered or tried; on the stated facts, links to Uttar Pradesh meant the Lucknow Special Court was not shown to lack jurisdiction. Residence of most accused or witnesses in Kerala and South India, by itself, was insufficient to justify transfer of the proceedings to Ernakulam. A remand under Section 167(2) CrPC also did not bar later filing of the complaint at Lucknow, because that provision operates with reference to the forwarding Magistrate even if that court lacks trial jurisdiction. en-us Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Oct 2025 15:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436386 Territorial jurisdiction for a PMLA prosecution complaint depends on where the alleged money-laundering activity occurred, not where the scheduled offence was registered or tried; on the stated facts, links to Uttar Pradesh meant the Lucknow Special Court was not shown to lack jurisdiction. Residence of most accused or witnesses in Kerala and South India, by itself, was insufficient to justify transfer of the proceedings to Ernakulam. A remand under Section 167(2) CrPC also did not bar later filing of the complaint at Lucknow, because that provision operates with reference to the forwarding Magistrate even if that court lacks trial jurisdiction. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436386