Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.22 seconds)
Surendra Kumar Jindal vs Union Of India Through Enforcement ... on 29 November, 2024 cites

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

2023 SCC OnLine SC 1393] wherein it was held as under : (Manish Sisodia case [Manish Sisodia v. CBI, (2024) 12 SCC 691 : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1393] , SCC paras 34-35) "34. Detention or jail before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not become punishment without trial. If the trial gets protracted despite assurances of the prosecution, and it is clear that case will not be decided within a foreseeable time, the prayer for bail may be meritorious. While the prosecution may pertain to an economic offence, yet it may not be proper to equate these cases with those punishable with death, imprisonment for life, ten years or more like offences under the Narcotic Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34015 of 2024(15) dt.29-11-2024 12/17 Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, murder, cases of rape, dacoity, kidnaping for ransom, mass violence, etc. Neither is this a case where 100/1000s of depositors have been defrauded. The allegations have to be established and proven.
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Pankaj Kr. Mishra vs Union Of India on 31 July, 2018

He further submits that the latest decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of V. Senthil Balaji Vs. Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 2626 (Criminal Appeal No. 4011 of 2024) was subsequently followed in the case of Pankaj Mishra Vs. the Union of India in B.A. No. 8271 of 2024 whereby the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court has held that the trial for the offence of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34015 of 2024(15) dt.29-11-2024 6/17 money laundering cannot be concluded unless the trial for scheduled offence is concluded. In support of his argument, learned counsel has relied on one another judgement of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 20 - K Joseph - Full Document

Common Cause (A Regd. Society) vs Union Of India on 9 March, 2018

5. After hearing the parties, the main contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that the basis and genesis of these ECIR proceedings/complaint cases are begin by virtue of the collection of loose sheets. Therefore, these cases are not maintainable and cannot be looked into by this Court at this stage due to this reason alone. This Court is not sitting in the inherent jurisdiction and is cautious that only this aspect has to be looked into that whether bail can be granted or not ? Therefore, this question that initiation of the case by the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34015 of 2024(15) dt.29-11-2024 8/17 Enforcement Directorate on the basis of loose sheets particularly in the light of the judgement on which the petitioner relied on i.e. Common Cause (A Registered Society) Vs. the Union of India and Ors. reported in AIR 2017 SC 540 shall not be taken ito consideration at this level particularly at the time of consideration of bail and therefore, this Court has left this question open for the parties to challenge before the appropriate stage before the appropriate forum.
Supreme Court of India Cites 130 - Cited by 396 - D Misra - Full Document

Y.S.Jagan Mohan Reddy vs C.B.I on 9 May, 2013

No.34015 of 2024(15) dt.29-11-2024 9/17 Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2013) 7 SCC 439 in which it has held that the economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 396 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Prem Prakash vs Union Of India And Ors on 22 August, 1984

9. Here, in the present case, the question of liberty recognized by the constitution under Article 21 and the question of curtailment of liberty by virtue of Section 45 of the PMLA is directly involved which has been well discussed and answered in the case of Prem Prakash (supra) and those observations have been followed by the different judgements by the various High Courts as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Here in the present case, the complaint case arising out of ECIR /PTZO/14/2023 has already been concluded, after the investigation against all the petitioners on the basis of which Special Court has already taken cognizance on 10.11.2023 and 08.05.2024 and only trial has to be concluded about which the learned Sr. Counsel for the Union of India has specifically submitted that the trial shall be commenced and shall be concluded within 6-12 months but on the other hand, there are 20 different FIRs /cases said to be the predicate /scheduled offence. Out of 20 cases, in 13 cases investigation is still Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34015 of 2024(15) dt.29-11-2024 15/17 pending whereas in the rest seven cases in which cognizance has been taken, the trial has not been commenced in six cases. As such, this Court is of the firm view that there is no possibility of conclusion of the trial of predicate offence within a few years.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 50 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document
1   2 Next