Revival of PMLA twin bail conditions after the 2018 amendment, but anticipatory bail granted on facts and medical infirmity.

Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was treated as operating with revived twin bail conditions after the 2018 amendment, because the amended provision was regarded as effective unless struck down and not diluted merely because the entire section was not reenacted. On the facts, anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners because the alleged disproportionate assets were below one crore rupees and medical material showed illness and infirmity, subject to compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC conditions. The applications were allowed and release on arrest or surrender was directed on specified terms.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the twin conditions in Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 stood revived after the 2018 amendment; (ii) whether the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail in the facts of the case.

Issue (i): whether the twin conditions in Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 stood revived after the 2018 amendment.

Analysis: The amended provision was read as operative and effective unless struck down. The Court accepted the view that legislative intervention changed the complexion of Section 45 and that the amended provision could not be diluted merely because the entire section was not reenacted. The Court therefore treated the twin conditions as having revived and becoming applicable after the amendment.

Conclusion: The twin conditions were held to stand revived and to operate after the amendment.

Issue (ii): whether the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail in the facts of the case.

Analysis: The Court noted that the alleged disproportionate assets were below one crore rupees and that both petitioners were supported by medical material showing illness and infirmity. In these circumstances, and subject to compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Court found it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was granted to both petitioners.

Final Conclusion: The applications were allowed and the petitioners were directed to be released on arrest or surrender on specified conditions.

Ratio Decidendi: After the 2018 amendment, Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 operates with revived bail restrictions, but anticipatory bail may still be granted where the statutory exception applies and the facts justify conditional relief.

---