https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782565 The HC dismissed the application for pre-arrest bail under PMLA, holding that its jurisdiction is strictly governed by the twin conditions in Section 45(1), which apply equally to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC (now Section 482 BNSS). Since the Public Prosecutor opposed bail, the court was required to be satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to believe the applicant was not guilty and would not commit an offence while on bail. Given the ongoing investigation, large quantum involved, alleged non-cooperation, need for custodial interrogation, and risk of influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence, the HC found these conditions unsatisfied and refused bail. en-us Thu, 20 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 08:35:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782565 The HC dismissed the application for pre-arrest bail under PMLA, holding that its jurisdiction is strictly governed by the twin conditions in Section 45(1), which apply equally to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC (now Section 482 BNSS). Since the Public Prosecutor opposed bail, the court was required to be satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to believe the applicant was not guilty and would not commit an offence while on bail. Given the ongoing investigation, large quantum involved, alleged non-cooperation, need for custodial interrogation, and risk of influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence, the HC found these conditions unsatisfied and refused bail. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 20 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782565