TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....026. For the Respondent - State: Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP in Bail Application No. 3148 of 2026. For the Respondent - State: Mr. Amit A. Palkar, APP in Bail Application No. 3379 of 2026. P.C . 1. Heard Mr. Ponda, learned Senior Advocate for Applicants in Bail Application No. 3380 of 2026 and Bail Application No. 3148 of 2026; Mr. Ghag, learned Advocate for Applicant in Bail Application No. 3379 of 2026; Mr. Pendse, learned SPP for Respondent No. 1 - ED; Mr. Nakhwa, learned APP for Respondent - State in Bail Application No. 3380 of 2026; Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, learned APP for Respondent - State in Bail Application No. 3148 of 2026; and Mr. Palkar, learned APP for Respondent - State in Bail Application No. 3379 of 2026. 2. This is a group of three (3) Bail Applications decided together. All three (3) Applicants are arraigned as accused persons in the same crime and seek regular bail in connection with ECIR bearing No. ECIR/MBZO-II/20/2024 registered by Respondent No. 1 - Directorate of Enforcement for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "PMLA"). There are total of 6 accused persons. Applicant in Bail Appl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....principal accused person is still absconding and has not been arrested till date. He would submit that there is therefore every possibility that all three (3) Applicants will re-offend themselves by getting in touch with the principal accused person and will commit / repeat / continue the offence and shall re-offend themselves. He would submit that there is every likelihood that Applicants will jump bail and therefore he would persuade me to consider the gamut and the extent of the crime unearthed pursuant to investigation which is forming part of the humongous chargesheet of 7000 pages and reject the Bail Applications of Applicants. 5.1. He has drawn my attention to three (3) separate Affidavits-in-reply filed by the Assistant Director, Zonal Office II, Mumbai on behalf of Respondent No. 1 and Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India dated 09.09.2026 in the three matters and would vehemently submit that releasing the Applicants on bail would hinder the tracing of proceeds of crime dealt with by the accused persons in the present crime. He has addressed the Court at length on change in circumstances, facts of the case where substantial transactions were en....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scope of Article 21 of the Constitution. Relying on Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India this Court observed that Section 436-ACrPC should not be construed as a mandate that an accused should not be granted bail under the PMLA till he has suffered incarceration for the specified period. This Court recorded the assurance given by the prosecution that they shall conclude the trial by taking appropriate steps within next 6-8 months. This Court, after recording the said submissions, granted liberty to the appellant to move a fresh application for bail in case of change in circumstances or in case the trial was protracted and proceeded at a snail's pace in next three months. This Court observed that if any application was filed, the same would be considered by the trial court on merits without being influenced by the dismissal of the earlier bail applications including its own judgment. It further observed that the observations made regarding the right to speedy trial will be taken into consideration." 8. The argument advanced by Mr. Pendse while referring to the decision in the case of Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary (Supra) has been squarely answered and dealt with in the afores....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Vs. Enforcement Directorate 2026 SCC OnLine SC 30 wherein accused was incarcerated for 16 months 20 days and it considered the maximum sentence which would be of 7 years which is also so for the present Applicants before me. The co-ordinate bench also considered the aspect of prolonged incarceration and pre-trial detention and most importantly right to speedy trial enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India notwithstanding the nature of offence and punishment it entailed. 10. In the present case maximum punishment in PMLA Special case is 7 years and charge-sheet of 7000 pages is filed and 40 witnesses are to be examined by the prosecution and it is bound to take a very long time for trial to commence and for that matter conclude. Hence on parity as well as on the ground of long incarceration and right to speedy trial being considered as grounds for grant of bail. I am inclined to release to all three (3) Applicants on bail. 11. Further, the apprehension expressed by Mr. Pendse is taken care of by imposing stringent conditions in addition to the usual conditions including the condition suggested by Mr. Pendse for deposit of their passports forthwith before the tri....