Money Laundering and its prevention: India - Revision history

Jyoti at 15:19, 19 May 2024

2024-05-19T15:19:10Z

Jyoti: /* Banks penalised */

2024-05-19T15:00:30Z

‎Banks penalised

Pdewan: /* YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS */

2024-05-14T18:41:11Z

‎YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS

Pdewan: /* Banks penalised */

2024-05-14T18:40:41Z

‎Banks penalised

Jyoti: /* Supreme Court’s rulings */

2024-04-18T16:49:47Z

‎Supreme Court’s rulings

Pdewan: /* 2022 */

2024-03-21T20:52:33Z

‎2022

Jyoti: /* Banks penalised */

2022-09-09T20:09:49Z

‎Banks penalised

Jyoti at 18:27, 11 August 2021

2021-08-11T18:27:27Z

Jyoti: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- |colspan="0"|
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.
Additional information ma..."

2021-02-04T06:49:01Z

Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- |colspan="0"|<div style="font-size:100%"> This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.<br/> Additional information ma..."

New page

{| class="wikitable"
|-
|colspan="0"|<div style="font-size:100%">
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.<br/>
Additional information may please be sent as messages to the Facebook <br/>community, [http://www.facebook.com/Indpaedia Indpaedia.com]. All information used will be gratefully <br/>acknowledged in your name.
</div>
|}

[[Category:India |B ]]
[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources |B ]]

=Banks penalised=
==PNB fined for rule violation/ 2019==
[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIM%2F2019%2F08%2F03&entity=Ar02209&sk=373A6DB6&mode=text August 3, 2019: ''The Times of India'']

PNB fined for anti-money laundering rule violation

Mumbai:

In one of the steepest ever penalties for violation of anti-money laundering rules by a bank, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) has slapped a penalty of over Rs 15 crore on state-run Punjab National Bank (PNB).

Bank sources said that the lapses were not serious and were largely procedural. “We have 7,000 branches and open some 20,000 accounts every day. We are sensitising our offices,” said an executive, adding that the bank will appeal against the order.
Separately, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed penalties in the Rs 1-2 crore range on eight public sector lenders for violations related to opening and operating current accounts, discounting of bills, cyber security framework and frauds classification and reporting by commercial banks.

“A scrutiny was carried out by RBI in the accounts of the companies of a group and it was observed that the banks had failed to comply with provisions of one or more of the directions issued by RBI as mentioned above,” the regulator said in a statement.

The list names Allahabad Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union Bank of India.

=See also=
[[Demonetisation of high value currency- 2016: India]]

[[INX money laundering case]]

[[Money Laundering and its prevention: India ]]

[[Money Laundering: South Asia ]]

[[Prevention of Money Laundering Act]]

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
-[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
+=History=
-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
+==How the law was enacted and became so draconian and pervasive==
-[[Category:India|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
+[https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/who-gave-india-its-most-draconian-law-congress-or-bjp/articleshow/109804939.cms  Sunil Baghel, May 14, 2024: ''The Times of India'']
-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
-[[Category:Pages with broken file links|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
+The reference is to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the mere mention of which sends shivers down the spines of politicians, especially those opposed to the ruling dispensation. Just ask Hemant Soren, Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and K Kavitha. But apart from answering the question asked above, this piece will raise another – does a law like PMLA have a place in a democratic country like India?
 =Supreme Court’s rulings=
@@ Line 135: / Line 139: @@
 MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
 [[Category:India|B
 MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:00, 19 May 2024
Line 63:		Line 63:

	The list names Allahabad Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union Bank of India.		The list names Allahabad Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union Bank of India.
		+
		+	=Enforcement Directorate’s powers=
		+	==ED can’t arrest accused after special court takes cognisance of complaint: SC==
		+	[https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ed-cant-arrest-accused-after-special-court-has-taken-cognisance-of-complaint-sc-9332418/ May 17, 2024: ''The Indian Express'']
		+
		+	The bench of Justices A S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, which was hearing Tarsem Lal vs Directorate of Enforcement, Jalandhar Zonal Office, said, “After cognisance is taken of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA based on a complaint under Section 44, the ED and its officers are powerless to exercise powers under Section 19 to arrest a person shown as accused in the complaint. If the ED wants custody of the accused who appears after service of summons for conducting further investigation in the same offence, ED will have to seek custody of the accused by applying to the special court.”
		+
		+	“If the accused appears before the special court pursuant to a summons, he shall not be treated as if he is in custody. Therefore, it is not necessary for him to apply for bail. However, the special court can direct the accused to furnish bonds in terms of Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC),” it said.
		+
		+	The question before the Supreme Court was whether an accused, once he appears before the Special Court in response to a summons, will still be required to apply for bail in terms of Section 437 of the CrPC and if he has to, whether it will be governed by the twin conditions imposed by Section 45 of the PMLA.
		+
		+	In the case pursued by the ED Jalandhar Zonal Office, a bond executed by a PMLA case accused under Section 88 of CrPC was treated as a bail proceeding notwithstanding that he appeared before the court in compliance with the summons issued to him. As a consequence, he had to seek bail. He then approached the High Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Denying him relief, the High Court said he had not satisfied the second condition under Section 45 of PMLA.
		+
		+
		+	''' The relief this ruling provides '''
		+
		+	The Supreme Court’s ruling extends protection against arrest by the ED when an accused is actively participating in the investigation without being evasive. The relief is significant as the bar for grant of bail, once arrested, is very high in ED cases.
		+
		+	The bench said the special court “after hearing the accused… must pass an order on the application after recording brief reasons. While hearing such an application, the court may permit custody only if it is satisfied that custodial interrogation at that stage is required even though the accused was never arrested under Section 19”.
		+
		+	“However, when ED wants to conduct further investigation concerning the same offence, it may arrest a person not shown as an accused in the complaint already filed, provided the requirements of Section 19 are fulfilled,” it said.
		+
		+	“If the accused was not arrested by the ED till the filing of the complaint by taking cognisance of a complaint under Section 44 as a normal rule, the court should issue a summons to the accused and not a warrant. Even in the case where the accused is on bail, a summons must be issued,” it said.
		+
		+	The bench said that special courts can even grant exemption from appearance in a case where the accused shows sufficient cause.
		+
		+	“If the accused does not appear, the special court can issue a warrant in terms of Section 70 CrPC. The special court must issue first a bailable warrant. If it is not possible to effect service of bailable warrant, then recourse can be taken to non-bailable warrants,” it said.
		+
		+	It said “a bond furnished according to Section 88 CrPC is only an undertaking by an accused who is not in custody to appear before the court on the date fixed”. Therefore, an order accepting bonds under Section 88 from the accused does not amount to a grant of bail, it said.
		+
		+	If a warrant is issued on account of non-appearance, the court has the power to cancel the warrant and it is not necessary to apply for bail, the bench clarified.
		+
		+	[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources\|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
		+	MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:India\|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
		+	MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
		+	MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]

	=YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS=		=YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS=

@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 [[Category:Pages with broken file links|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
 MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
 =YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS=
@@ Line 58: / Line 76: @@
 Ex-CMs named are BJP’s B S Yediyurappa, Congress’s B S Hooda, Virbhadra Singh (since deceased), O Ibobi Singh, JDS's Gegong Apang, Congress’s Nabam Tuki, INLD’s O P Chautala (trial completed), NCP’s Churchill Alemao and Congress’s Digambar Kamat & Ashok Chavan.
+[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
 =See also=

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:40, 14 May 2024
Line 10:		Line 10:


−	~~=Banks penalised=~~
−	~~==PNB fined for rule violation/ 2019==~~
−	~~[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIM%2F2019%2F08%2F03&entity=Ar02209&sk=373A6DB6&mode=text August 3, 2019: ''The Times of India'']~~

−	~~PNB fined for anti-money laundering rule violation~~
−
−	~~Mumbai:~~
−
−	In one of the steepest ever penalties for violation of anti-money laundering rules by a bank, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) has slapped a penalty of over Rs 15 crore on state-run Punjab National Bank (PNB).
−
−	Bank sources said that the lapses were not serious and were largely procedural. “We have 7,000 branches and open some 20,000 accounts every day. We are sensitising our offices,” said an executive, adding that the bank will appeal against the order.
−
−	Separately, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed penalties in the Rs 1-2 crore range on eight public sector lenders for violations related to opening and operating current accounts, discounting of bills, cyber security framework and frauds classification and reporting by commercial banks.
−
−	“A scrutiny was carried out by RBI in the accounts of the companies of a group and it was observed that the banks had failed to comply with provisions of one or more of the directions issued by RBI as mentioned above,” the regulator said in a statement.
−
−	~~The list names Allahabad Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union Bank of India.~~

		+	[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources\|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
		+	MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:India\|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
		+	MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
		+	MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]

	=Supreme Court’s rulings=		=Supreme Court’s rulings=

@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 In a 545-page verdict penned by Justice AM Khanwilkar, the SC examined thread- bare all the controversial provisions of PMLA that were challenged by petitioners, and found all of those to be valid.
-[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
+==Can grant bail in PMLA cases if trial delayed: SC. 2024==
-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
+[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=21_03_2024_023_007_cap_TOI  AmitAnand Choudhary, March 21, 2024: ''The Times of India'']
-[[Category:India|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
 [[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
@@ Line 48: / Line 53: @@
 [[Category:India|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
 MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
-[[Category:Pages with broken file links|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
+[[Category:Pages with broken file links|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIAMONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
 MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 =Supreme Court’s rulings=
-==2022 ==
+==2022: SC upholds the validity of the Act ==
 [https://epaper.timesgroup.com/article-share?article=28_07_2022_001_016_cap_TOI  AmitAnand Choudhary, July 30, 2022: ''The Times of India'']
@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 [[Category:India|B MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA
 MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
 [[Category:Pages with broken file links|MONEY LAUNDERING AND ITS PREVENTION: INDIA]]
 =YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS=

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 Bank sources said that the lapses were not serious and were largely procedural. “We have 7,000 branches and open some 20,000 accounts every day. We are sensitising our offices,” said an executive, adding that the bank will appeal against the order.
 Separately, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed penalties in the Rs 1-2 crore range on eight public sector lenders for violations related to opening and operating current accounts, discounting of bills, cyber security framework and frauds classification and reporting by commercial banks.
@@ Line 26: / Line 27: @@
 The list names Allahabad Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union Bank of India.
 =YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS=

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 |}
-[[Category:India |B ]]
-[[Category:Economy-Industry-Resources |B ]]
 =Banks penalised=
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 The list names Allahabad Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union Bank of India.
 =See also=
@@ Line 37: / Line 51: @@
 [[Prevention of Money Laundering Act]]

Money Laundering and its prevention: India - Revision history

Jyoti at 15:19, 19 May 2024

Jyoti: /* Banks penalised */

Pdewan: /* YEAR-WISE DEVELOPMENTS */

Pdewan: /* Banks penalised */

Jyoti: /* Supreme Court’s rulings */

Pdewan: /* 2022 */

Jyoti: /* Banks penalised */

Jyoti at 18:27, 11 August 2021

Jyoti: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- |colspan="0"| This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Additional information ma..."

Jyoti: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- |colspan="0"|
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.
Additional information ma..."