Anticipatory bail in a PMLA complaint granted where no risk of absconding, tampering, or witness influence was shown.

Anticipatory bail in a PMLA complaint was granted because the complaint had already been filed, co-accused had received similar relief, and the Court found no material apprehension that the applicant would abscond, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses. Noting that the trial was likely to take time and expressing no view on the merits, the Court held the request fit for protection against arrest, subject to furnishing the required bond, surety, and conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with the complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: The complaint had already been filed. Co-accused persons had been granted anticipatory bail. The Court found no apprehension that the applicant would abscond, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses, and noted that the trial was likely to take some time. Without expressing any view on the merits, the Court found the request fit for grant of anticipatory bail.

Conclusion: The applicant was granted anticipatory bail on furnishing the required bond and surety, subject to the stated conditions.

---