<?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>2024 (2) TMI 441 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449290</link>
    <description>Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was refused because the statutory twin conditions were not met. The Court reiterated that, when bail is opposed, the Public Prosecutor must be heard and the applicant must show reasonable grounds to believe that he is not guilty and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. On the material before it, including the complaint and the applicant&#039;s statements, the Court found prima facie indicators of bogus and paper transactions, unsupported claims of goods movement, journal voucher adjustments, and diversion of funds. Treating money-laundering as a serious economic offence, the Court held the mandatory conditions remained unsatisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 07:20:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 441 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449290</link>
      <description>Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was refused because the statutory twin conditions were not met. The Court reiterated that, when bail is opposed, the Public Prosecutor must be heard and the applicant must show reasonable grounds to believe that he is not guilty and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. On the material before it, including the complaint and the applicant&#039;s statements, the Court found prima facie indicators of bogus and paper transactions, unsupported claims of goods movement, journal voucher adjustments, and diversion of funds. Treating money-laundering as a serious economic offence, the Court held the mandatory conditions remained unsatisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449290</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>