Back
ANOOP CHITKARA
Neeraj Saluja – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
PREDICATE OFFENCES [FOR THE CURRENT ECIR]:
| S. No. | FIR No. | Date | Offences | Police Station |
| 1. | RC2232020A0004 | 06.08.2020 | 120-B, 403, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of PC Act | AC-V Delhi |
SCHEDULED OFFENCES [IN THE PRESENT PETITION]:
| ECIR No. | Dated | Sections |
| ECIR/JLZO/36/2020 | 08.10.2020 | 3 & 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] |
1. An industrialist incarcerated on the allegations of illegally diverting Rs.1530.99 crores from the loan amount for a purpose other than it was sanctioned, and subsequently, the above-captioned complaint was registered under PMLA for proceeds of crime based on the predicate offense, instead of filing a bail petition under Section 439 CrPC/483 BNSS had come up before this under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of arrest order and subsequent remand orders being illegal and contrary to judicial precedents.
2. The facts of the case are taken from the reply filed by the respondent- ED. The CBI registered the above-captioned predicate offense against the petitioner and some of his family members for causing wrongful loss to a con
The necessity of providing documented 'reasons to believe' at the time of arrest under Section 19 of PMLA is a statutory requirement that must be adhered to for the arrest to be lawful.
Judicial review of PMLA arrests limited to procedural compliance; 'reasons to believe' under s.19 valid on prima facie material like seized assets, statements; no need for naming in predicate FIRs; o....
The court upheld the legality of the petitioner's arrest under the PMLA, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with statutory safeguards and the scope of judicial review.
The court ruled that the arrest of the petitioner was unlawful due to insufficient evidence linking him to illegal mining, which is not a scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Ac....
The court upheld the legality of the arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, confirming compliance with statutory requirements, including timely communication of grounds for arrest.
The court upheld that arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was lawful as procedural requirements of Section 19 were sufficiently met, emphasizing limits of judicial review on subjectiv....
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as there were no reasonable grounds for believing that she had committed an off....
Money Laundering – Power to arrest under Section 19 (1) of PMLA is not for the purpose of investigation – Arrest can and should wait and power in terms of Section 19(1) of PMLA can be exercised only ....
Compliance with Section 19 of PMLA and satisfaction of twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA are crucial for determining the validity of arrest and granting bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
