PMLA bail conditions remain stringent where prima facie laundering links and forged land transactions are alleged.

Regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was examined by reference to the statutory definitions of proceeds of crime and property, the offence of money laundering, the Section 50 statements, and the mandatory Section 45 conditions. The material was treated as showing prima facie involvement in obtaining powers of attorney, facilitating forged transactions, receiving funds linked to the alleged laundering activity, and assisting acquisition and sale of land through fake deeds. The note also records that the laundering offence is independent of the scheduled offence, so non-impleadment in the predicate offence was not decisive. Custody length and trial delay were found insufficient against the gravity of allegations and the statutory bail rigour, and bail was rejected for failure to satisfy the twin conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in view of the alleged involvement in acquisition, use and projection of proceeds of crime, and whether the custody period and pendency of trial justified release on bail.

Analysis: The application was examined in the light of the statutory scheme of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, especially the definitions of proceeds of crime and property, the offence of money laundering, the presumption under the Act, and the mandatory bail conditions. The material relied upon in the prosecution complaint and the statements recorded under Section 50 indicated prima facie involvement of the petitioner in obtaining powers of attorney, facilitating forged transactions, receiving money linked to the alleged laundering activity, and assisting in the acquisition and sale of land through fake deeds. The offence under the Act was treated as independent of the scheduled offence, and the absence of arraignment in the predicate offence was held not decisive. The contention based on custody and delay was found insufficient in view of the gravity of the allegations, the special statutory rigour governing bail, and the requirement that both bail conditions under Section 45 must be satisfied.

Conclusion: The petitioner failed to satisfy the mandatory twin conditions for bail and the bail plea was rejected.

---