<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (8) TMI 1002 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776814</link>
    <description>Regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 requires satisfaction of the mandatory twin conditions, assessed against the statutory definitions of proceeds of crime, property and money laundering, the applicable presumption, and the material collected during investigation. Prima facie material indicated involvement in powers of attorney, forged land transactions, receipt of laundering-linked funds, and acquisition and sale of land through false deeds. Money laundering operates independently of the scheduled offence, so non-arraignment in the predicate offence was not decisive. The gravity of allegations, statutory rigour and failure to meet both bail conditions outweighed custody duration and trial pendency; bail was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 08:34:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=844522" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1002 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776814</link>
      <description>Regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 requires satisfaction of the mandatory twin conditions, assessed against the statutory definitions of proceeds of crime, property and money laundering, the applicable presumption, and the material collected during investigation. Prima facie material indicated involvement in powers of attorney, forged land transactions, receipt of laundering-linked funds, and acquisition and sale of land through false deeds. Money laundering operates independently of the scheduled offence, so non-arraignment in the predicate offence was not decisive. The gravity of allegations, statutory rigour and failure to meet both bail conditions outweighed custody duration and trial pendency; bail was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776814</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>