https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444310 The Telangana HC treated the 2013 amendment to Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as clarificatory and not merely prospective, so the explanation inserted by the amendment applied from the inception of the statute and money-laundering was viewed as a continuing activity. On the material before the Court, recovery of cash from A.2's locker, the petitioner's custody of the locker keys, and the supporting documents were sufficient to show prima facie complicity, so discharge under Section 227 CrPC was refused and the revision failed. en-us Thu, 05 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Oct 2023 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444310 The Telangana HC treated the 2013 amendment to Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as clarificatory and not merely prospective, so the explanation inserted by the amendment applied from the inception of the statute and money-laundering was viewed as a continuing activity. On the material before the Court, recovery of cash from A.2's locker, the petitioner's custody of the locker keys, and the supporting documents were sufficient to show prima facie complicity, so discharge under Section 227 CrPC was refused and the revision failed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 05 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444310