Continuing PMLA attachment and custodial interrogation justified refusal of anticipatory bail in an alleged fraudulent property sale case.

Attachment confirmed under Section 8(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act continued to operate while criminal proceedings remained pending before the competent court, so the 365-day limitation applicable during investigation did not apply. The pending challenge to the attachment orders also showed that the restraints had not ceased. At the anticipatory bail stage, the Court declined to assess whether the alleged offences were ultimately made out and relied instead on the seriousness of the economic offence, the petitioner's execution of sale deeds despite restraints, and the need for custodial interrogation. Pre-arrest protection was therefore refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR alleging fraudulent sale of properties under attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: The attachment confirmed under Section 8(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was held to continue during the pendency of the criminal proceedings before the competent court, and the 365-day limitation applicable during investigation was found inapplicable. The challenge to the attachment orders was also pending, which supported the conclusion that the orders had not ceased to operate. The Court further held that, at the stage of anticipatory bail, it was not appropriate to determine whether the alleged offences were ultimately made out, particularly in view of the seriousness of the economic offence, the petitioner's conduct in executing sale deeds despite restraints, and the need for custodial interrogation.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined and the petition was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed on merits because the attachment orders were treated as continuing and the circumstances justified denial of pre-arrest protection.

Ratio Decidendi: Where attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is confirmed and criminal proceedings are pending before court, the attachment continues during the pendency of those proceedings, and anticipatory bail may be refused in an economic offence when custodial interrogation is found necessary.

---