Anticipatory bail in money-laundering cases may be refused where custodial interrogation is needed to trace proceeds of crime.

Anticipatory bail in a money-laundering prosecution was assessed against the background of Section 438 CrPC and the special bail conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Court held that the twin conditions in Section 45 could not be used to exclude consideration of pre-arrest bail in the manner urged, but found the allegations of concealment of proceeds of crime, manipulation of records, and a larger economic-offence conspiracy sufficient to justify custodial interrogation. Treating economic offences as a distinct class requiring stricter scrutiny, the Court declined anticipatory bail and rejected the application.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 should be granted to an in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, in view of the amended bail conditions and the need for custodial interrogation.

Analysis: The application was considered in the setting of a money-laundering prosecution arising from a larger economic-offence inquiry. The Court held that the twin conditions in Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could not be applied to defeat consideration of anticipatory bail in the manner urged by the respondent. Even so, the materials collected in investigation showed a serious economic offence, alleged manipulation of records, concealment of proceeds of crime, and circumstances indicating that custodial interrogation was required to unravel the larger conspiracy and trace the money trail. The Court treated economic offences as a distinct class requiring a stricter approach to pre-arrest bail.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined and the application was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The applicant was not entitled to pre-arrest protection in the facts of the case because the seriousness of the alleged laundering activity and the investigative need for custody outweighed the claim for anticipatory bail.

Ratio Decidendi: In a serious economic-offence prosecution, anticipatory bail may be refused where the investigation indicates concealment of proceeds of crime and custodial interrogation is necessary, even if the bail conditions under the special statute are not applied in the manner suggested by the prosecution.

---