<?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>BNSS hearing before cognizance applies to PMLA complaints; absence of accused hearing vitiates the cognizance order.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100008</link>
    <description>Sections 223 to 228 of the BNSS were held applicable to PMLA complaints before the Special Court, because Sections 46 and 65 of the PMLA permit CrPC/BNSS procedure unless expressly excluded or inconsistent, and no such inconsistency was found. The Court held that an inquiry under the savings clause requires a judicial act applying mind, so merely filing or numbering a complaint does not save pre-BNSS procedure. The first proviso to Section 223(1) gives the accused a mandatory right to be heard before cognizance; taking cognizance after the BNSS commenced without that hearing was an illegality that vitiated the order. The impugned cognizance order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 07:06:44 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 07:06:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903185" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>BNSS hearing before cognizance applies to PMLA complaints; absence of accused hearing vitiates the cognizance order.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100008</link>
      <description>Sections 223 to 228 of the BNSS were held applicable to PMLA complaints before the Special Court, because Sections 46 and 65 of the PMLA permit CrPC/BNSS procedure unless expressly excluded or inconsistent, and no such inconsistency was found. The Court held that an inquiry under the savings clause requires a judicial act applying mind, so merely filing or numbering a complaint does not save pre-BNSS procedure. The first proviso to Section 223(1) gives the accused a mandatory right to be heard before cognizance; taking cognizance after the BNSS commenced without that hearing was an illegality that vitiated the order. The impugned cognizance order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the accused.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 07:06:44 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>