2025 (11) TMI 1102 - HC - Money Laundering

Interim bail denied in money-laundering case where medical records showed chronic hip condition with no imminent surgery or hospitalization

Bhupesh Arora Versus Directorate of Enforcement.

HC refused interim bail in a money-laundering case seeking release on grounds of the applicant's mother's ill health. The court found medical records and ... Money Laundering - Seeking grant of Interim Bail on account of the ill health of his mother - seriousness of medical grounds sought - exaggeration of facts - HELD THAT:- From the prescription, it is nowhere evident that the mother has to be admitted or that she has a vital reportedly stable for her to undergo the Hip replacement Surgery. Interestingly, the Prescription is of 19.08.2025 recommending a procedure to be undertaken in November, 2025, i.e. after about three months - It is also pertinent to note that the Applicant himself has stated in his Application that while there is an urgency of getting the Total Hip Replacement surgery done but the “family, however, intends to proceed with the surgery at a private medical facility, depending upon the health condition and logistical feasibility at the relevant time.” It is abundantly clear from the submissions made in the Interim Bail Application coupled with the medical documents, that there is no surgery fixed in the near future. It is only in the contemplation of the Petitioner, but that in itself cannot create any imminent situation entitling him to Interim Bail - This aspect also needs to be considered in the light of the fact that her treating doctor was Dr. Sumit Gupta. The ED had got the verification and the confirmation about the medical condition and the proposed surgery from Dr. Sumit Gupta, who in response to a specific query, had stated that her course of treatment is “She is under orthopaedic follow-up and on conservative management–analgesics, physiotherapy, calcium/vitamin supplements, and walking support. Future surgical intervention may be considered if symptoms worsen.” Further, it has been stated that the condition is chronic and moderately severe-which causes pain and restricted movement but is not life-threatening. Furthermore, prolonged bed rest is not required - the responses by the treating doctor to the queries in regard to the medical condition of Smt. Asha Rani, also confirm that the Total Hip Replacement Surgery is only contemplation in case, if it becomes inevitable in the situation of further deterioration, which cannot be managed by conservative treatment and physiotherapy. There is no imminent surgical intervention plan. She is presently on conservative treatment with physiotherapy and a medication. The Interim Bail is, therefore declined, at this stage. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED 1. Whether interim bail on humanitarian/compassionate grounds is permissible where investigations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) are complete but prosecution has filed complaint and case is at pre-cognizance stage. 2. Whether the conditions under Section 45 PMLA (and analogous principles governing bail in PMLA matters) apply to interim bail applications on medical grounds. 3. Whether the medical facts and records supplied by the applicant establish an imminent, compelling need for interim bail to enable a specified surgical procedure for a family member. 4. Whether the applicant poses a flight risk or danger of tampering with evidence/witnesses such that interim bail should be refused notwithstanding humanitarian grounds. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Issue 1 - Permissibility of interim bail where PMLA investigations are complete and prosecution complaint filed Legal framework: Consideration of interim bail applications under B.N.S.S. (Sections invoked analogous to Cr.P.C. provisions for bail) read with the PMLA scheme; balancing of humanitarian relief against statutory objectives of PMLA and public interest in serious economic offences. Precedent Treatment: The respondent relied on established authorities (cited in the record) treating stringent standards for bail in PMLA matters; those authorities/decisions were invoked to emphasize caution in granting relief in serious money-laundering cases. Interpretation and reasoning: The Court noted that investigations concerning the applicant had concluded and a prosecution complaint was on file though the matter remained at pre-cognizance stage. The Court thus treated the application as one seeking temporary humanitarian relief while recognising the seriousness of completed investigations and pending prosecution. The Court applied a balancing exercise - weighing personal humanitarian considerations against the statutory scheme and gravity of alleged offences. Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - interim bail in PMLA matters requires clear and compelling humanitarian necessity that cannot be accommodated by less intrusive measures, particularly where investigations are complete and the accused is alleged to be central to large-scale laundering. Conclusion: Interim bail is not precluded per se, but given completed investigations and gravity, a higher threshold of immediacy and necessity is required; the present facts did not meet that threshold. Issue 2 - Applicability of Section 45 PMLA conditions to interim bail on medical grounds Legal framework: Section 45 PMLA imposes specific conditions and stringent safeguards while considering bail-related relief in PMLA cases; analogous judicial interpretations require consideration of statutory safeguards even for interim relief. Precedent Treatment: The respondent relied on decisions emphasizing that conditions under Section 45 need application even when considering medical/interim bail (as reflected by citations in the record). The Court accepted the relevance of these precedents in principle, treating them as guiding the assessment of risk and the need for strict scrutiny. Interpretation and reasoning: The Court treated Section 45 considerations as relevant and applicable to interim bail requests on medical grounds, requiring robust justification before disturbing custodial status in serious money-laundering allegations. The statutory protections informed the caution exercised by the Court. Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - statutory bail constraints in PMLA (Section 45) inform and circumscribe the grant of interim humanitarian relief; such relief cannot ignore statutory safeguards and policy considerations underlying PMLA. Conclusion: Section 45 considerations apply and weigh against grant of interim bail absent convincing, imminent medical necessity and assurances to mitigate flight/tampering risk. Issue 3 - Sufficiency of medical records to establish imminent, compelling need for interim bail for family surgery Legal framework: Humanitarian grounds may justify interim bail where medical necessity is immediate and irreplaceable by alternative arrangements; courts examine contemporaneous medical records, treating physician opinion, and feasibility of non-custodial care. Precedent Treatment: The Court applied established principles requiring clear, imminent, and documented medical urgencies, and considered verification by the treating doctor as central. Interpretation and reasoning: The Court scrutinised the medical evidence: past fracture with plate fixation, conservative management, multiple postponed surgery dates, an OPD note recommending that the patient 'may come on 21.11.2025' for THR and a treating doctor's response that current management was conservative with surgery contemplated only if symptoms worsen. The Court observed the absence of an unequivocal, imminent surgical plan, inconsistencies in applicant's own pleadings (intention to shift to private facility, dates not fixed), and the treating doctor's confirmation that care could be managed at home with family assistance. The Court concluded that the medical records did not demonstrate an urgent, unavoidable need for immediate inpatient surgical intervention that would justify interim bail. Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - interim bail for family medical reasons requires demonstrable immediacy: fixed operative dates, treating doctor's clear recommendation for immediate surgery or hospitalization, and inability of other family members to provide required care; speculative or deferred surgical plans are insufficient. Conclusion: The medical documentation did not establish an imminent compelling need; conservative management was ongoing and home-based care was feasible; therefore humanitarian grounds alone did not warrant interim bail. Issue 4 - Flight risk, dissipation of proceeds and tampering with evidence as bar to interim bail Legal framework: Bail considerations include danger of absconding, tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and risk of dissipation of proceeds - factors intensified in complex cross-border money-laundering schemes. Precedent Treatment: The Court treated prior findings and conduct relevantly - including non-appearance, absconsion, foreign residence, issuance of NBW, RCN, declaration as Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO) - as material to assessing risk. Interpretation and reasoning: The Court relied on the prosecution's record that the applicant had absconded for an extended period, lived abroad with access to assets, was declared a fugitive economic offender, had NBWs/RCN, and had allegedly used informal routes for cross-border movement. These facts, previously considered by the trial court in refusing regular bail, were accepted as establishing significant flight and tampering risks. In light of these risks and the PMLA context involving international laundering networks and hawala channels, the Court found that granting interim bail would create serious apprehension of dissipation of proceeds and evasion of process. Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - in serious, internationalized money-laundering cases with proven absconding and asset/international connections, significant flight/tampering risks may independently outweigh humanitarian considerations and justify refusal of interim bail. Conclusion: The applicant's prior absconding, foreign links, and status as an alleged central mastermind presented compelling flight and tampering risks that militated against interim bail. Overall Conclusion and Disposition Applying the statutory framework, precedent-guided scrutiny of PMLA bail conditions, detailed analysis of medical records (including independent verification by treating doctor), and consideration of substantial flight/tampering risks, the Court concluded that the applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite immediacy and compelling humanitarian necessity to justify interim bail. The interim bail application was therefore declined.