https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760521 The SC declared Section 3(2) of both the unamended 1988 Act and the 2016 Act unconstitutional for being arbitrary and violating Article 20(1). Section 5's in rem forfeiture provision was also deemed unconstitutional. The 2016 Act's punitive provisions were held to apply prospectively, quashing pre-2016 prosecutions. The review petition was allowed, restoring Civil Appeal No. 5783 of 2022 for fresh adjudication. The judgment highlighted the necessity of a legal dispute for constitutional challenges and emphasized due process in property matters. en-us Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:33:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760521 The SC declared Section 3(2) of both the unamended 1988 Act and the 2016 Act unconstitutional for being arbitrary and violating Article 20(1). Section 5's in rem forfeiture provision was also deemed unconstitutional. The 2016 Act's punitive provisions were held to apply prospectively, quashing pre-2016 prosecutions. The review petition was allowed, restoring Civil Appeal No. 5783 of 2022 for fresh adjudication. The judgment highlighted the necessity of a legal dispute for constitutional challenges and emphasized due process in property matters. Case-Laws Benami Property Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760521