<?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 (10) TMI 1397 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468158</link>
    <description>The offence of money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is independent and targets the process connected with proceeds of crime derived from a scheduled offence. Although the existence of a scheduled offence is necessary, the prosecution need not await the conclusion of every proceeding arising from that offence. Where the scheduled offence had already led to conviction of the principal accused and the PMLA complaint was based on the alleged use of those proceeds, the money-laundering trial was not rendered unlawful merely because the petitioner&#039;s proceedings in the scheduled offence remained under challenge. The stay in the scheduled offence did not control the PMLA prosecution, and the request to defer the trial was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 12:42:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 1397 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468158</link>
      <description>The offence of money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is independent and targets the process connected with proceeds of crime derived from a scheduled offence. Although the existence of a scheduled offence is necessary, the prosecution need not await the conclusion of every proceeding arising from that offence. Where the scheduled offence had already led to conviction of the principal accused and the PMLA complaint was based on the alleged use of those proceeds, the money-laundering trial was not rendered unlawful merely because the petitioner&#039;s proceedings in the scheduled offence remained under challenge. The stay in the scheduled offence did not control the PMLA prosecution, and the request to defer the trial was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>