Anticipatory bail in PMLA prosecutions remains exceptional where material links the accused to proceeds of crime.

Anticipatory bail under section 438 CrPC is not readily available in a PMLA prosecution because section 45 imposes a stringent bail regime requiring hearing of the Public Prosecutor and satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and will not commit any offence on bail. The Court treated money-laundering and other economic offences as serious matters where pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary remedy to be granted sparingly. On the facts, material linked the applicant to the alleged fake Remdesivir sale and showed a money trail indicating proceeds of crime, so the application was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could be granted in a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in view of section 45 of that Act and the alleged lack of custodial requirement.

Analysis: The application arose from allegations of money-laundering linked to the sale of fake Remdesivir injections. The Court noted that section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 creates a stringent bail regime and that bail can be granted only if the Public Prosecutor is heard and the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The Court further relied on the principle that economic offences stand on a serious footing and that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary remedy to be granted sparingly. On the facts, the Court found material indicating involvement of the applicant and a money trail showing proceeds of crime.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was not available to the applicant and the application was dismissed.

---