https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445834 Summons under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act were held to be a lawful investigative power for collecting evidence and records, and were not quashed merely because the noticee was not yet an accused; Article 20(3) protection was treated as inapplicable at that stage. The ECIR challenge was treated as premature because the petitioner was not shown to be an accused, the ECIR was not on record, and no prosecution complaint had been filed. The Court also declined blanket protection against coercive steps, noting that summons are distinct from arrest powers and that statutory remedies, including anticipatory bail if needed, remained available. en-us Fri, 17 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Feb 2025 12:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445834 Summons under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act were held to be a lawful investigative power for collecting evidence and records, and were not quashed merely because the noticee was not yet an accused; Article 20(3) protection was treated as inapplicable at that stage. The ECIR challenge was treated as premature because the petitioner was not shown to be an accused, the ECIR was not on record, and no prosecution complaint had been filed. The Court also declined blanket protection against coercive steps, noting that summons are distinct from arrest powers and that statutory remedies, including anticipatory bail if needed, remained available. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 17 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445834