PMLA regular bail under twin conditions failed where investigative material raised disputed facts and no satisfaction of innocence was reached.

In PMLA regular bail proceedings, the Delhi HC applied the twin conditions under Section 45 and held that they were not satisfied. The Court considered allegations relating to forged bank guarantees, supporting endorsements, electronic communications, statements recorded under Section 50, and other investigative material. It found that disputes over the applicant's knowledge, role, and the alleged absence of proceeds of crime raised factual issues for trial, but the enforcement material could not be ignored at the bail stage. On the material available, the Court was not satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to believe the applicant was not guilty, and regular bail was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail in proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in view of the twin conditions under Section 45 of the Act.

Analysis: The Court considered the allegations of forged bank guarantees, supporting endorsements and electronic communications, together with statements recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and other investigative material. It held that the rival contentions regarding the applicant's knowledge, role, and alleged absence of proceeds of crime raise disputed questions of fact to be tested at trial. At the bail stage, the Court was not required to undertake a detailed appreciation of evidence, but the material placed by the Directorate of Enforcement could not be ignored. On the material available, the Court was unable to record satisfaction that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant was not guilty of the offence alleged.

Conclusion: The twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were not satisfied and regular bail was declined.

---