Proceeds-of-crime proof is required before continued PMLA freezing; general bribery allegations and investigative necessity are insufficient.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Under the PMLA, continued freezing or retention of property requires material linking the property to proceeds of crime and a statutory finding that it is involved in money laundering. General allegations of bribery, unconnected to identified transactions or quantified proceeds held by the property holder, do not meet that standard; continued freezing based solely on investigative necessity is unsustainable. Attachment, seizure and freezing may extend to property held by persons not named in the scheduled offence or money-laundering proceedings. Reasons to believe for search or freezing must be recorded, but post-recording communication is not mandatory where the show-cause notice incorporates the relevant reasons. Filing a prosecution complaint does not remove the Appellate Tribunal's jurisdiction over a freezing-confirmation order.....