https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461296 In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the Orissa HC noted that the alleged acquisition of properties prima facie fell within "proceeds of crime" and attracted the offence of money laundering under Section 3. The Court referred to the statutory presumption under Section 24 and the restrictive effect of Section 45, and treated issues relating to the scheduled offence as matters for the court in seisin of that case. On the material before it, the Court found no demonstrated need for custodial interrogation and declined anticipatory bail, holding that the prima facie PMLA case and the statutory bar under Section 45 weighed against pre-arrest protection. en-us Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Mar 2025 15:35:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461296 In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the Orissa HC noted that the alleged acquisition of properties prima facie fell within "proceeds of crime" and attracted the offence of money laundering under Section 3. The Court referred to the statutory presumption under Section 24 and the restrictive effect of Section 45, and treated issues relating to the scheduled offence as matters for the court in seisin of that case. On the material before it, the Court found no demonstrated need for custodial interrogation and declined anticipatory bail, holding that the prima facie PMLA case and the statutory bar under Section 45 weighed against pre-arrest protection. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461296