Money laundering bail conditions require innocence and non-reoffending satisfaction; material indicating organised smuggling supported continued custody.

Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires the court to be satisfied that an accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail. The notes state that seizure records, Section 50 statements, shipping documents and links to an exporting entity indicated a prima facie role in transporting and concealing smuggled red sanders and involvement with proceeds of crime. They further state that framing of charge in the predicate offence is not a precondition for action under Section 19 where the competent officer has material-based reasons to believe that money laundering occurred. Non-cooperation, absconding co-accused and organised activity were cited as supporting further custody.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for grant of bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: Section 45(1) requires satisfaction that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit an offence while on bail. The material comprising seizure records, statements recorded under Section 50, shipping documents, and links to the exporting entity disclosed a prima facie case of the applicant's active role in the transportation and concealment of smuggled red sanders and in a syndicate connected with identified proceeds of crime. Framing of charge in the predicate offence is not a precondition for action under Section 19 where the competent officer has formed reasons to believe on material that the person is guilty of money laundering. The applicant's non-cooperation, the abscondence of co-accused, and the organised nature of the alleged activity supported the need for further custody.

Conclusion: The applicant did not satisfy the statutory conditions for bail, and further custody was necessary.

---