https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309848 Proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were treated as capable of continuing independently of the final outcome of the predicate offence, with the explanation to Section 44 and the bail restrictions in Section 45 permitting action once a scheduled offence is alleged. Bail was declined because the petitioner had not fully cooperated with the investigation, had withheld documents concerning overseas entities, and could not treat the right to silence as a complete answer to investigative demands. The Court also accepted the prosecution's apprehension of flight risk arising from the petitioner's NRI status and overseas links, and found custody necessary to secure material evidence. en-us Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 24 Sep 2023 10:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309848 Proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were treated as capable of continuing independently of the final outcome of the predicate offence, with the explanation to Section 44 and the bail restrictions in Section 45 permitting action once a scheduled offence is alleged. Bail was declined because the petitioner had not fully cooperated with the investigation, had withheld documents concerning overseas entities, and could not treat the right to silence as a complete answer to investigative demands. The Court also accepted the prosecution's apprehension of flight risk arising from the petitioner's NRI status and overseas links, and found custody necessary to secure material evidence. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309848