https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461215 The Karnataka HC note states that repeated summons under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and continued enforcement of a look-out circular cannot rest on suspicion alone. Where the person had already appeared, statements were recorded, and no cognizable offence or non-bailable warrant was shown, further coercive restraint required reasonable ground or credible material linking him to incriminating evidence. The article also notes that a writ challenge under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC was treated as maintainable because it concerned liberty, right to travel, and alleged abuse of process. The coercive restraint was therefore set aside, while authorities could proceed if fresh incriminating material later emerged. en-us Tue, 26 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:21:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461215 The Karnataka HC note states that repeated summons under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and continued enforcement of a look-out circular cannot rest on suspicion alone. Where the person had already appeared, statements were recorded, and no cognizable offence or non-bailable warrant was shown, further coercive restraint required reasonable ground or credible material linking him to incriminating evidence. The article also notes that a writ challenge under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC was treated as maintainable because it concerned liberty, right to travel, and alleged abuse of process. The coercive restraint was therefore set aside, while authorities could proceed if fresh incriminating material later emerged. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 26 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461215