<?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>2022 (11) TMI 1387 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309111</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was refused because the allegations involved large-scale fraud, laundering of proceeds of crime, and attachment of properties already made in the case. On the material on record, the HC found it could not record a finding that the accused-applicant was not prima facie guilty of the offence. As the statutory bail requirement was therefore not met, the application for anticipatory bail was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2023 21:25:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=722306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 1387 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309111</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was refused because the allegations involved large-scale fraud, laundering of proceeds of crime, and attachment of properties already made in the case. On the material on record, the HC found it could not record a finding that the accused-applicant was not prima facie guilty of the offence. As the statutory bail requirement was therefore not met, the application for anticipatory bail was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309111</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>