https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771907 In a PMLA bail context, the Court treated the statutory restrictions under Section 45 alongside Article 21 and held that prolonged incarceration, the filing of the complaint, the absence of trial commencement, and the earlier setting aside of the cognizance order justified regular bail. It noted that the applicant had remained in custody for about one year, the maximum sentence was seven years, and the intervening detention was not consistent with Section 309(2) CrPC. On those facts, the Court found that continued custody could not substitute for trial and that the constitutional requirement of reasonable procedure prevailed. en-us Fri, 09 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Jun 2025 08:34:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771907 In a PMLA bail context, the Court treated the statutory restrictions under Section 45 alongside Article 21 and held that prolonged incarceration, the filing of the complaint, the absence of trial commencement, and the earlier setting aside of the cognizance order justified regular bail. It noted that the applicant had remained in custody for about one year, the maximum sentence was seven years, and the intervening detention was not consistent with Section 309(2) CrPC. On those facts, the Court found that continued custody could not substitute for trial and that the constitutional requirement of reasonable procedure prevailed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 09 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771907