2016 (8) TMI 1176

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Supreme Court "Noor Aga vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 16 SCC 417"; "Nirmal Singh Pehalwan @ Nimma v. Inspector, Customs, Customs House, Punjab; (2011) 12 SCC 298"; "Vinod Solanki v. Union of India; (2008) 16 SCC 537" as well as to the reference made to a larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide "Tofan Singh versus State of Tamil Nadu (2013) 16 Supreme Court Cases 31". 2. Petitioners also challenge the investigations under PMLA while claiming that the offences under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of PMLA are non-cognizable pursuant to the specific amendment carried out to Section 45 of the Act w.e.f. 21.5.2005 and, therefore, the appropriate procedure for conduct of investigations as per Chapter XII Cr.P.C. must be followed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....zable or non-cognizable and the procedure under Cr.P.C. to be followed has been extensively dealt with and the claim of the petitioners therein has been rejected. 6. It is pointed out that the judgment in Karam Singh's case is per incuriam as it does not take into the account the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Om Parkash's case. It is also urged in Karam Singh's case the contention dealt with was whether the offences under PMLA are 'non-cognizable and bailable'. Thus, it is urged that the complexion of the findings would change if the offences under the Act were to be construed as bailable. It is conceded that the offences under the Act are non-bailable and, therefore, the only aspect to be....