Protection in predicate offence doesn't automatically extend to PMLA case: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court ruled that protection from arrest in a predicate offence does not automatically apply to separate proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The court denied anticipatory bail to a businessman, citing the serious nature of economic offences.
Why it matters
Clarifies the legal distinction between standard criminal cases and money laundering investigations, setting a precedent for financial crime defense.
The Delhi High Court has held that protection granted in a predicate offence FIR does not mean it extends to distinct and independent proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The High Court made the observation while denying anticipatory bail to a businessman facing prosecution in a PMLA case.
It refused to accept the petitioner's contention that his apprehension of arrest must be considered in the backdrop of the protection granted to him by the Supreme Court in the predicate offence FIR.
"The protection granted in the predicate offence operates in the context of the said FIR and cannot, by itself, be construed as extending to the distinct and independent proceedings under the PMLA.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in