Bail Granted in Money Laundering Case with Health Consideration

The Court granted bail to the applicant in a money laundering case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Despite serious allegations of disproportionate assets and money laundering, the applicant's health condition, including severe medical issues, influenced the decision. Citing relevant legal provisions and precedents, the Court emphasized the need for a different approach for socio-economic offenses. The bail was allowed with conditions to prevent interference with evidence or witnesses.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Second bail application for the applicant.
2. Allegations of disproportionate assets and money laundering.
3. Applicant's health condition and its impact on bail consideration.
4. Legal provisions and precedents relevant to the bail application.

Summary:

Second Bail Application: This is the second bail application for the applicant in Complaint Case No. 4 of 2018 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), arising out of Complaint No. ECIR/05/PMLA/LZO/2015, registered with the Directorate of Enforcement, Lucknow.

Allegations of Disproportionate Assets and Money Laundering: An FIR was lodged on 30.07.2015 against Yadav Singh, the applicant (his wife), their children, and an associate, alleging that Yadav Singh, a former Chief Engineer, acquired benami properties and set up shell companies for laundering money. The Enforcement Directorate filed complaints in 2018, attaching properties worth Rs.14,48,15,830/-.

Applicant's Health Condition: The applicant, a woman with severe health issues including the removal of one kidney and suffering from anxiety, depression, and panic attacks, argued for bail based on her medical condition. The Trial Court previously rejected her bail application, questioning the authenticity of her medical records.

Legal Provisions and Precedents: The Court considered Section 45 (1) of the PMLA, which makes offenses under the Act non-bailable, but includes a proviso for women, sick, or infirm persons. The Court also referenced the Supreme Court judgments in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs. Union of India, Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy vs. CBI, and State of Bihar vs. Amit Kumar, emphasizing the seriousness of economic offenses but also noting the need for a different approach for socio-economic offenses.

Judgment: The Court noted that the principal co-accused, Yadav Singh, had already been granted bail and that the applicant, a woman with significant health issues, was the only one still in custody. The Court found sufficient grounds to grant bail, emphasizing the proviso in Section 45 (1) of the PMLA for women and sick persons. The bail application was allowed with conditions to ensure the applicant does not tamper with evidence, pressurize witnesses, or leave the country without permission.

---