Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (2.05 seconds)
Documents citing Naresh Kumar Kejriwal vs Directorate Of Enforcement ... on 6 December, 2019

Amit Kumar Agarwal vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 19 March, 2025

99. Again, in the case of Arvind Kejriwal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement (supra) the view has been taken for communication of reason of arrest and it has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the written ―grounds of arrest‖, though a must, does not in itself satisfy the compliance requirement. The authorized officer's genuine belief and reasoning based on the evidence that establishes the arrestee's guilt is also the legal necessity. As the ―reasons to believe‖ are accorded by the authorised officer, the onus to establish satisfaction of the said condition will be on the DoE and not on the arrestee.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 67 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 8 October, 2025

Directorate of Enforcement, (supra) Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, (supra) are misplaced in the facts of the present case. The said decisions only reinforce the requirement for proper application of mind, existence of reasons, and communication of grounds, all of which were duly complied with in the present case. In fact, these authorities uphold the power of arrest under -12- BBl 2025:JHHC:31170 Section 19 of PMLA where such procedural safeguards are satisfied.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 130 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Alamgir Alam S/O Late Sanaul Haque vs The Directorate Of Enforcement on 11 July, 2025

151. The Hon‟ble Apex Court has further observed that with the advancement of technology and Artificial Intelligence, the economic offences like money laundering have become a real threat to the functioning of the financial system of the country and have become a great challenge for the investigating agencies to detect and comprehend the intricate nature of transactions, as also the role of the persons involved therein. Reference in this regard be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate 108 B.A. No. 9548 of 2024 2025:JHHC:18996 of Enforcement (supra). The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid Judgment are being quoted as under:
Jharkhand High Court Cites 96 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Alamgir Alam S/O Late Sanaul Haque vs The Directorate Of Enforcement on 11 July, 2025

151. The Hon‟ble Apex Court has further observed that with the advancement of technology and Artificial Intelligence, the economic offences like money laundering have become a real threat to the functioning of the financial system of the country and have become a great challenge for the investigating agencies to detect and comprehend the intricate nature of transactions, as also the role of the persons involved therein. Reference in this regard be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate 108 B.A. No. 9548 of 2024 2025:JHHC:18996 of Enforcement (supra). The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid Judgment are being quoted as under:
Jharkhand High Court Cites 96 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Md. Jahangir Alam vs Directorate Of Enforcement ... on 19 November, 2025

82. But it needs to refer herein that on 07.05.2024 when the arrest of the petitioner was made by the ED, the judgment rendered by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the Arvind Kejriwal (supra) was not in the existence as the same was rendered by the Hon‟ble Apex Court on 12.07.2024, therefore on 07.05.2024 when petitioner was arrested it was not required for the ED to furnished the „reason to believe‟ in writing to the petitioner.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 98 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Prem Prakash vs Union Of India Through The Directorate ... on 10 September, 2025

34. Further, the ECIR is a preliminary document, recorded on initiation of investigation and not on completion of investigation under PMLA. Hence, as the active role of the petitioner cropped up in the instant case, he was arrested under section 19 of PMLA, 2002 for further investigation under PMLA. Further, the petitioner was arrested before the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arvind Kejriwal vs Directorate of Enforcement dated 12.07.2024, before which the reasons to believe recorded for arresting the accused was sent to the Ld. Adjudicating Authority in a sealed envelope. Hence, the averments of the petitioner are wrong and liable to be set aside.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 67 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Amit Kumar Agarwal vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 25 April, 2025

79.Again, in the case of Arvind Kejriwal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement (supra) the view has been taken for communication of reason of arrest and it has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the written "grounds of arrest", though a must, does not in itself satisfy the compliance requirement. The authorized officer's genuine belief and reasoning based on the evidence that establishes the arrestee's guilt is also the legal necessity. As the "reasons to believe" are accorded by the authorised officer, the onus to establish satisfaction of the said condition will be on the DoE and not on the arrestee.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 73 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document
1   2 Next