https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750736 In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, bail was refused because the statutory twin conditions for release under Section 45 were not satisfied. The court treated the material as showing a prima facie role in the alleged laundering activity, including involvement in the transaction, the land transfer, and linkage of funds to a firm beneficially owned by the petitioner. The jurisdiction challenge was not accepted at the bail stage, and parity with a co-accused was rejected because bail depends on the accused's own role and factual similarity; negative equality could not be claimed. The petitioner therefore failed to show reasonable grounds to believe he was not guilty or would not reoffend on bail. en-us Fri, 22 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Mar 2024 17:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750736 In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, bail was refused because the statutory twin conditions for release under Section 45 were not satisfied. The court treated the material as showing a prima facie role in the alleged laundering activity, including involvement in the transaction, the land transfer, and linkage of funds to a firm beneficially owned by the petitioner. The jurisdiction challenge was not accepted at the bail stage, and parity with a co-accused was rejected because bail depends on the accused's own role and factual similarity; negative equality could not be claimed. The petitioner therefore failed to show reasonable grounds to believe he was not guilty or would not reoffend on bail. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 22 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750736