https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757708 Statements recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act from a person already in judicial custody in another case investigated by the same agency were held inadmissible against the maker, as such statements were not made with a free mind and could not safely be treated as voluntary. Co-accused statements were treated as non-substantive evidence usable only for corroboration. On bail under Section 45, the Court reaffirmed that the provision imposes a twin-condition inquiry, not an absolute bar, and found the prosecution material insufficient to show reasonable grounds of guilt or a likelihood of reoffending. Bail was therefore warranted. en-us Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jun 2026 15:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757708 Statements recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act from a person already in judicial custody in another case investigated by the same agency were held inadmissible against the maker, as such statements were not made with a free mind and could not safely be treated as voluntary. Co-accused statements were treated as non-substantive evidence usable only for corroboration. On bail under Section 45, the Court reaffirmed that the provision imposes a twin-condition inquiry, not an absolute bar, and found the prosecution material insufficient to show reasonable grounds of guilt or a likelihood of reoffending. Bail was therefore warranted. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757708