https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442288 The constitutional validity of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 was treated as settled because the Supreme Court had already upheld the statute, so the challenge failed. Money-laundering was held to be a distinct offence from offences under the ULA(P) Act, and the bar against double jeopardy under Article 20(2) did not apply; the parallel prosecution objection was rejected. The court also noted that liability depends on the accused's dealing with proceeds of crime, not merely the date of the predicate offence, so proceedings were not barred because the predicate offence predated its inclusion in the Schedule. The writ petitions were found meritless and the proceedings were sustained. en-us Thu, 10 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442288 The constitutional validity of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 was treated as settled because the Supreme Court had already upheld the statute, so the challenge failed. Money-laundering was held to be a distinct offence from offences under the ULA(P) Act, and the bar against double jeopardy under Article 20(2) did not apply; the parallel prosecution objection was rejected. The court also noted that liability depends on the accused's dealing with proceeds of crime, not merely the date of the predicate offence, so proceedings were not barred because the predicate offence predated its inclusion in the Schedule. The writ petitions were found meritless and the proceedings were sustained. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 10 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442288