Anticipatory bail under PMLA declined where prima facie material showed alleged concealment and projection of proceeds of crime.

Anticipatory bail was declined in a PMLA prosecution where the material showed a prima facie role in concealment, possession, acquisition, use and projection of properties alleged to be derived from proceeds of crime. The Court considered the alleged non-deposit of rice, the claimed generation of proceeds of crime, provisional attachment of properties and the absence of satisfactory material showing a lawful source for the assets under scrutiny. On that basis, it found sufficient indication of involvement in money laundering linked to the scheduled offence and denied pre-arrest protection.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged money laundering arising out of a scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: The application was tested on the materials relating to the alleged non-deposit of rice, the claimed generation of proceeds of crime, the investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and the alleged acquisition and projection of properties as untainted. The circumstances relied upon by the prosecution included the alleged role of the petitioner in the scheduled offence, the identification and provisional attachment of properties, and the absence of satisfactory material showing lawful source for the properties under scrutiny. On that basis, the Court found a prima facie case of involvement in concealment, possession, acquisition, use, and projection of properties alleged to be derived from proceeds of crime.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined and the petitioner was not granted pre-arrest protection.

---