The court granted regular bail to the accused in a money...

The court granted regular bail to the accused in a money laundering case, considering the prolonged incarceration, the likelihood of delay in trial, and the constitutional right to liberty and fair trial. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents that held Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot override Article 21's fundamental right to life and personal liberty. While Section 45 imposes additional conditions for bail, it does not create an absolute prohibition. When trial is delayed for reasons not attributable to the accused, prolonged incarceration would violate the right to speedy trial. The court balanced the stringent provisions of PMLA against the constitutional mandate, concluding that using Section 45 as a tool for indefinite incarceration is impermissible. Considering the circumstances, including the main accused being out on bail and the trial's stagnation, the court granted regular bail to the applicant, subject to furnishing personal bond and surety.