Anticipatory bail in money-laundering cases denied where money-trail investigation remained necessary and statutory twin conditions were unsatisfied.

Anticipatory bail in a money-laundering investigation was unavailable where investigation material alleged that the petitioner facilitated a sub-contract to an entity connected with his son and that proceeds were transferred to family members. The absence of direct credit to the petitioner's account was not determinative, as further investigation was required to trace the money trail and pre-arrest bail does not permit conclusive assessment of evidence. The statutory twin conditions for bail could not be satisfied. Medical records also did not show a continuing serious condition, emergency, or urgent intervention warranting protection from arrest.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail in a money-laundering investigation, including on medical grounds.

Analysis: The material at the investigation stage indicated that the petitioner allegedly facilitated the award of a sub-contract to an entity connected with his son and that the alleged proceeds were transferred to family members. The absence of a direct credit to the petitioner's account was not determinative. The allegations, financial material and need to trace the money trail required further investigation; at the pre-arrest bail stage, the evidence was not to be assessed conclusively. The statutory twin conditions for bail were not capable of being satisfied in the petitioner's favour at that stage. The available medical record did not establish a continuing serious condition, medical emergency, or urgent intervention warranting protection from arrest.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to anticipatory bail, either on merits or medical grounds.

---