<?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>2026 (5) TMI 1166 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791964</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail was refused in an alleged organised economic offence involving illegal online betting, cheating, forgery, corruption and laundering through fake accounts, hawala channels, shell entities and foreign transfers. The Court applied the settled principle that economic offences are a distinct class and warrant a stricter approach at the pre-arrest stage, especially where investigation is continuing and custodial interrogation may be needed to trace the transaction chain, digital evidence and conspiracy links. Allegations of non-naming in earlier proceedings, mala fides and parity were not accepted, as they required fuller evidentiary appraisal and did not outweigh the need for an effective investigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 08:30:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903085" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1166 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791964</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail was refused in an alleged organised economic offence involving illegal online betting, cheating, forgery, corruption and laundering through fake accounts, hawala channels, shell entities and foreign transfers. The Court applied the settled principle that economic offences are a distinct class and warrant a stricter approach at the pre-arrest stage, especially where investigation is continuing and custodial interrogation may be needed to trace the transaction chain, digital evidence and conspiracy links. Allegations of non-naming in earlier proceedings, mala fides and parity were not accepted, as they required fuller evidentiary appraisal and did not outweigh the need for an effective investigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>