Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2023 (3) TMI 745 - HC - Money LaunderingGrant of Anticipatory Bail - Money Laundering - scheduled offences - proceeds of crime - discharge of burden of prove - Hawala transactions - HELD THAT - While rejecting the discharge application of the applicant learned trial court has specifically observed that on the basis of prima facie investigation made by ED it appears that the applicant is prima facie involved in Hawala ie. illegal transfer of money from nation to foreign countries. Prima facie there is sufficient material which warrants this court to arrive at prima facie inferences that applicant is involved in such serious case wherein discretion is not required to be exercised. The learned trial court has further observed that as per Section 24 burden shifted upon the accused to show that proceeds of crime are untainted property and the applicant has prima facie miserably failed to discharge his burden under Section 24. It was further observed that there is serious allegations against the applicant so far as Hawala chapter is concerned wherein the Hawala entries via Dubai (UAE) crores of rupees have been credited in the accounts of wife of the applicant as well as his children in USA and the wife of the applicant was made partner in a firm to the extent of 30% by investment of only Rs. 1 lakh and getting crores of rupees from India as well as UAE. It appears from the record that at this stage on the basis of the charge sheet and documents produced with it court should have to take decision. The defence taken and evidences produced by the accused should not be considered at this stage. At the present stage it is to see that whether prima facie offence is there against the accused or not and evaluation of evidence produced by the accused and evaluation of the evidence should not be considered at this stage. Considering the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality irregularity or impropriety and present revision is liable to be dismissed and accordingly stands rejected.
|