PMLA bail turns on corroboration of retracted statements and prolonged custody despite the statutory twin conditions.

Bail under the money-laundering statute remains constrained by the statutory twin conditions, but retracted statements cannot safely sustain continued incarceration without independent reliable corroboration. The prosecution material here was largely indirect, the applicant was not named in the FIR or ECIR, and the principal incriminating statements were later retracted. Prolonged custody, continued investigation, and the fact that trial had not begun were treated as relevant factors at the bail stage. On that basis, the material was considered insufficient to establish prima facie guilt for the statutory bail test, and release on bail with conditions was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant had made out a case for bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act despite the statutory twin conditions, whether the retracted statements relied upon by the prosecution were sufficiently reliable to sustain continued incarceration, and whether the delay in investigation and prolonged custody justified release on bail.

Analysis: The bail request was considered in the setting of the strict conditions governing release under the money-laundering statute. The material against the applicant consisted largely of statements recorded during investigation and certain emails and documents said to connect him with the laundering activity. The Court found that the applicant was not named in the FIR or ECIR, that much of the prosecution material was indirect, and that the principal incriminating statements had subsequently been retracted. Once retracted, such statements could not safely be treated as substantive proof without reliable independent corroboration. The Court also noted that the applicant had already spent substantial time in custody, the investigation had continued for a long period, and the trial had not begun. In these circumstances, continued detention was considered unjustified at the bail stage.

Conclusion: The applicant satisfied the threshold for bail. The prosecution material did not establish, even prima facie, that he was guilty for the purposes of the statutory bail test, and prolonged pre-trial detention also weighed in favour of release.

Final Conclusion: Bail was granted with conditions, and the application was disposed of accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi: For bail under the money-laundering statute, retracted statements require independent reliable corroboration, and where the available material remains only prima facie and the accused has suffered prolonged custody amid continuing investigation, release on bail may be justified notwithstanding the seriousness of the allegations.

---