PMLA bail refused for prima facie money-laundering nexus, as predicate offences and investigation material showed serious laundering allegations.

Regular bail under PMLA was refused because the record showed a prima facie nexus between the scheduled offences and the alleged money-laundering activity. The existence of an FIR for the predicate offences was sufficient to set the PMLA process in motion, and the PMLA proceedings were treated as independent of the stage of the scheduled-offence case. Investigation material, including Section 50 statements, account analysis, and recovery of large cash deposits and demand drafts, supported serious allegations of laundering demonetized currency. Given the stringent bail regime under Section 45 and the gravity of the allegations, no sufficient ground for release on bail was found.

---

---

Issues: Whether regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was to be granted to the petitioner facing prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: The allegations disclosed a prima facie nexus between the scheduled offences and the money-laundering prosecution. The existence of an FIR for scheduled offences was sufficient to trigger investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and the proceedings under that Act were independent of the stage of the scheduled-offence case. The material collected in investigation, including statements under Section 50, account analysis, and recovery of large cash deposits and demand drafts, showed serious allegations of laundering of demonetized currency. In view of the stringent bail regime under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and the gravity of the allegations, no sufficient ground for release on bail was made out.

Conclusion: Bail was declined and the application was dismissed.

---