<?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 (9) TMI 1089 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778600</link>
    <description>In a PMLA bail application, the Court applied the statutory twin conditions and required reasonable grounds to believe the accused was not guilty and was not likely to commit any offence on bail. Finding prima facie material of involvement in a grave economic offence, ongoing investigation into the proceeds of crime, and a real risk of interference with evidence and witnesses, it held that the threshold was not met and bail was unwarranted. It further held that parity, prolonged custody and Article 21 personal liberty could not override the seriousness of the allegations, the applicant&#039;s distinct role and influence, or the need to protect the investigation. Bail was therefore declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2025 08:33:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=851662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 1089 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778600</link>
      <description>In a PMLA bail application, the Court applied the statutory twin conditions and required reasonable grounds to believe the accused was not guilty and was not likely to commit any offence on bail. Finding prima facie material of involvement in a grave economic offence, ongoing investigation into the proceeds of crime, and a real risk of interference with evidence and witnesses, it held that the threshold was not met and bail was unwarranted. It further held that parity, prolonged custody and Article 21 personal liberty could not override the seriousness of the allegations, the applicant&#039;s distinct role and influence, or the need to protect the investigation. Bail was therefore declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>