Women accused under PMLA are exempt from twin bail conditions, and ordinary bail principles then apply to custody and trial delay.

The proviso to Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is treated as an exception to the twin bail conditions in clause (ii), so a woman accused is not required to satisfy those conditions. Once that exception applies, bail is assessed on ordinary principles, including custody period, absence of antecedents, stage of trial, and likely trial duration. On the stated facts-prolonged custody, no evidence having commenced, a large witness list, and no criminal antecedents-the material justified enlargement on bail pending trial, subject to terms fixed by the Special Court.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the proviso to Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 exempts a woman accused from satisfying the twin conditions under clause (ii) of Section 45(1); (ii) Whether bail should be granted on the facts of prolonged custody, non-commencement of evidence, absence of antecedents, and the expected length of the trial.

Issue (i): Whether the proviso to Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 exempts a woman accused from satisfying the twin conditions under clause (ii) of Section 45(1).

Analysis: The proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 45 operates as an exception to clause (ii) of that provision. On that construction, a woman applying for bail is not required to satisfy the twin conditions. The respondent also accepted that the rigours of clause (ii) would not apply to a woman in view of the proviso.

Conclusion: The proviso exempts a woman accused from the twin conditions under Section 45(1)(ii) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Issue (ii): Whether bail should be granted on the facts of prolonged custody, non-commencement of evidence, absence of antecedents, and the expected length of the trial.

Analysis: The accused had been in custody since 25 November 2023, the charge had been framed, evidence had not yet commenced, 67 witnesses were to be examined, no antecedents were shown, and the maximum punishment for the predicate offence was seven years. In those circumstances, the application was to be considered under the general bail provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the facts justified enlargement on bail pending trial.

Conclusion: Bail was warranted on the facts and the appellant was entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the appellant obtained bail subject to appropriate terms and conditions to be fixed by the Special Court.

Ratio Decidendi: The proviso to Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 excludes women accused from the twin bail conditions, and once that exception applies, bail is to be assessed on the ordinary bail principles having regard to custody, antecedents, and the progress of trial.

---