Court Grants Bail in Money Laundering Case

The court granted bail to the applicant in a case involving allegations of money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Despite previous rejections, the applicant's health condition and parity with co-accused who were granted bail were considered compelling reasons for the court to allow bail. Conditions were imposed to prevent tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Second bail application for release of the applicant.
2. Allegations and evidence against the applicant.
3. Previous court orders and interim protections.
4. Health conditions of the applicant.
5. Legal arguments and opposition to the bail.
6. Applicable legal provisions and precedents.

Summary:

Issue 1: Second Bail Application
The applicant filed a second bail application in Complaint Case No. 13 of 2017 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, 2002).

Issue 2: Allegations and Evidence
An FIR was lodged against Yadav Singh and others for corrupt practices. The Enforcement Directorate's complaint named the applicant, wife of Yadav Singh, as an accused. It was alleged that Rs. 50,00,000/- was transferred to M/s Kusum Garments, where the applicant is a director, as part of proceeds of crime.

Issue 3: Previous Court Orders and Interim Protections
The Supreme Court and High Court had provided interim protections to the applicant, allowing her to apply for bail and preventing arrest for specified periods. Despite these protections, her bail applications were rejected multiple times by lower courts.

Issue 4: Health Conditions of the Applicant
The applicant, an elderly woman, suffers from severe health issues including having only one kidney, anxiety, depression, and panic attacks. Her health condition was considered in previous court orders.

Issue 5: Legal Arguments and Opposition
The applicant's counsel argued for bail based on her health and the fact that all co-accused had been granted bail. The Enforcement Directorate opposed the bail, citing the applicant's involvement in money laundering and referencing Supreme Court judgments that emphasize the severity of economic offences.

Issue 6: Applicable Legal Provisions and Precedents
The court considered Section 45(1) of PMLA, which makes offences under the Act non-bailable, and the proviso allowing bail for women or sick persons. The court also referred to the Supreme Court's interpretation that bail should be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty.

Conclusion:
The court found the applicant's health condition and the fact that all co-accused had been granted bail sufficient grounds for granting bail. The bail application was allowed with conditions to ensure the applicant does not tamper with evidence, pressurize witnesses, or leave the country without permission.

---