2026 (2) TMI 115 - SCH - Money Laundering

Regular bail in PMLA prosecution where trial delay persists - appellants granted release as trial unlikely to finish promptly

Appellants are accused of using proceeds of crime of approximately Rs.73 lakhs derived from the predicate offence; despite serious charges against some ... Regular bail - Grant of bail where trial not likely to be completed within a reasonable time - Proceeds of crime - HELD THAT:- The sum and substance of the case of the respondent, as against the appellants is, that pursuant to the offence committed as the predicated offence, and the proceeds of crime have been utilized by the appellant(s) to the tune of Rs.73 lakhs. Respondents submits that except the accused – appellant Devender Singh, the other two accused appellants -Rahul Parashar and David Mario Denis have serious charges against them. In the present case, it is, therefore, submitted that in view of the rigors of Section 45 of the PMLA, there is no need to interfere with the impugned orders which have been passed by the High Court. The fact which still remains, is that the appellants have been under incarceration for more than two years and six months, and the trial has just commenced. Thus, we are inclined to grant bail to the appellants, since the trial is not likely to be completed within a reasonable time. Appeals stand allowed, accordingly. Issues: Whether the appellants are entitled to regular bail in proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.Analysis: The proceedings concern offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the applicability of the stringent framework under Section 45 of the PMLA. Relevant facts considered include the alleged proceeds of crime amount, the stage of the trial, the period of pre-trial incarceration exceeding two years and six months, and the prospects of completion of trial within a reasonable time. The balance between the statutory rigour applicable to PMLA offences and the impact of prolonged pre-trial detention on the accused was examined, with emphasis on delay in trial as a factor warranting bail where trial is not likely to conclude within a reasonable time.Conclusion: Bail granted to the appellants; impugned orders set aside and appellants released on bail on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Trial Court (in favour of the appellants).