![[Money Laundering Case] 'Fund Flow into Ansari's Accounts': SC Grants Bail to MLA Abbas Ansari](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/image-35-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, On 18th October, The Supreme Court granted bail to MLA Abbas Ansari on October 18 amid ongoing legal issues linked to money laundering accusations. Abbas, son of deceased gangster-politician Mukhtar Ansari, is entangled in a case initiated by the Enforcement Directorate. Despite the bail, legal challenges persist as investigations continue into the family’s financial activities.
Today, On 17th October, the Supreme Court postponed the review hearing of its 2022 decision on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to November 27. The previous ruling affirmed the Enforcement Directorate’s powers to arrest and seize property without an FIR, provoking debate on state powers versus individual rights in financial crime enforcement.
![[Chhattisgarh Liquor Scam] "Statements Under Section 50 of PML Act, 2002 Can Be Used to Initiate Criminal Cases": HC Denies Relief to Ex-IAS Anil Tuteja](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/image-9-2.png?resize=447%2C350&ssl=1)
The Allahabad High Court denied former IAS officer Anil Tuteja relief concerning the Chhattisgarh liquor scam, ruling the Uttar Pradesh FIR valid despite the Supreme Court quashing a related money laundering case. The court emphasized that ED witness statements can support ongoing criminal proceedings against Tuteja and others accused of involvement in a Rs. 2,000 crore syndicate.
![[School Jobs Scam] SC Seeks ED's Response on Partha Chatterjee's Bail Plea](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/School-jobs-scam_-CBI-court-reserves-order-on-ex-WB-minister-Partha-Chatterjees-bail-plea-_-Kolkata-News-The-Indian-Express.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, On 1st October, the Supreme Court asked the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to respond to former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee’s bail plea related to a school jobs-for-cash scam. The Calcutta High Court previously denied bail due to significant asset recoveries linked to the case, which involves corruption in school job recruitments.
Today, On 26th September, the Supreme Court ruled that the Enforcement Directorate cannot use Section 45 of the PMLA to detain individuals without trial. While granting bail to former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji, the court emphasized the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, highlighting concerns over prolonged incarceration.
![[BREAKING] SC Grants Bail to Ex-TN Minister V. Senthil Balaji in Money Laundering Case](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-2024-09-26T102520.872.png?resize=300%2C168&ssl=1)
![[Relaxation of Bail Condition] Supreme Court Seeks UP Govt's Reply on Kerala Journalist Siddique Kappan's Plea in UAPA Case](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-290.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today(17th Sept), The Supreme Court directed Uttar Pradesh to respond to Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan’s plea for relaxation of his bail condition requiring weekly visits to a local police station. The Court, led by Justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan, scheduled the case for hearing in two weeks.
![[Delhi Excise Scam] Delhi Court Grants Bail to Alleged 'Middleman' Vinod Chauhan](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Court-sends-Vinod-Chauhan-accused-of-sending-25cr-to-AAP-Goa-via-hawala-to-ED-custody.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, On 12th September, A Delhi court granted bail to Vinod Chauhan, a suspected middleman in the Delhi excise policy scam, after being accused of facilitating illegal activities. Chauhan’s bail was set at Rs 10 lakh, and he is linked to alleged kickbacks provided to the Aam Aadmi Party for their Goa election campaign. The excise case involves prominent political figures and allegations of corruption and money laundering.
Today(4th September),The Supreme Court of India discussed the accused’s right to access documents collected by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) during investigations. Justices Oka, Amanullah, and Masih questioned whether denying such access on technical grounds violates constitutional rights under Article 21.