PMLA twin conditions for bail not met where records indicated active laundering involvement and proceeds of crime.

Section 45 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 barred bail where the material showed active involvement in laundering proceeds of crime and the twin conditions were not met. The complaint and witness statements indicated that alleged illegal gains from an MMRDA contract constituted proceeds of crime, and that the applicant had manipulated profitability sheets, enabled under-deployment billing, and assisted the sharing and use of those proceeds. On that material, the Court treated the case as falling within Section 3 and Section 2(1)(u), and held that reasonable grounds could not be recorded for believing the applicant was not guilty. Bail was therefore refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 in view of the material showing involvement in the alleged laundering of proceeds of crime and the revived twin conditions for bail.

Analysis: The complaint and witness statements were read to show that the alleged illegal gains arising from the MMRDA contract constituted proceeds of crime and that the applicant had played an active role in manipulating profitability sheets, facilitating under-deployment billing, and assisting the sharing and use of the illegal proceeds. The Court held that this material was sufficient to attract Section 3 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 and to bring the case within the definition of proceeds of crime under Section 2(1)(u). It further relied on the revived twin conditions under Section 45(1) of the Act and held that, on the material before it, reasonable grounds could not be recorded for believing that the applicant was not guilty of the offence.

Conclusion: Bail was not granted, as the twin conditions under Section 45(1) were not satisfied.

---