Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.31 seconds)
Mohd Ilyas vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 4 December, 2024 cites

P. Chidambaram vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 5 September, 2019

In P. Chidambaram vs. Directorate of Enforcement (2019) 9 SCC 24, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has held that a scheduled/predicate offence is a sine qua non for the offence of money-laundering which would generate the money which is being laundered. At its highest, this allegation links the petitioner to generation of „proceeds of crime‟ which is not a crime under the PMLA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 78 - Cited by 2721 - R Banumathi - Full Document

Manish Sisodia vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 30 October, 2023

42. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the petitioners have generated proceeds of crime, even then, prima facie, the petitioners do not have dominion and control over the said alleged proceeds of crime. Admitted case of the ED is that the petitioners collected the Digitally Signed Page 20 of 31 By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.12.2024 12:14:28 funds and deposited the same with the accountant or PFI‟s account. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Manish Sisodia (I) (supra) has dealt with the same and observed as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1