PMLA | Bail Can Be Granted To Accused If Trial Is Not Likely To Be Concluded In Near Future: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that bail can be granted to the accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) if the trial is not likely to be concluded soon if the circumstances so warrant.
These observations were made while granting bail to Aam Admi Party (AAP) MLA Jaswant Singh in a money laundering case.
Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu noted that Singh has been in custody since 06.11.2023. The complaint was filed on 04.01.2024. As per the stand taken by the E.D. itself, the investigation qua other co-accused is still going on. "Thus, not even remotely, there would be any chance that trial is likely to be concluded in the near future," the Court added.
It further observed that It has also come on record that out of total dues of Rs.41 crore, an amount of over Rs.35.50 crore has already been recovered and attached by the E.D.
Perusing the medical records Justice Sindhu opined that Singh "is not keeping good health and he can be safely termed as a “sick person” within the ambit of Section 45 of PMLA."
Singh was booked under PMLA for allegedly being a director and guarantor of a company M/s TCL, which had obtained loan and credit facilities of over Rs.41 crores. The amount is alleged to have been diverted to other companies, contrary to the terms and conditions of extending the credit facilities.
An FIR was lodged under Sections 406, 409, 420, 421 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Thereafter ED found that offences falling within the definition of “Scheduled Offence” under Section 2 (y) of PMLA.
After examining the submissions, the Court referred to Manish Sisiodia's case wherein the Apex Court held that "Detention or jail before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not become punishment without trial. If the trial gets protracted despite assurances of the prosecution, and it is clear that case will not be decided within a foreseeable time, the prayer for bail may be meritorious. While the prosecution may pertain to an economic offence, yet it may not be proper to equate these cases with those punishable with death, imprisonment for life, ten years or more like offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the cases of murder, cases of rape, dacoity, kidnaping for ransom, mass violence, etc."
The Court rejected the ED's contention that the petitioner may hamper the ongoing investigation if released on bail.
The judge said that the objection raised by ED is based merely on surmises and there is no material to substantiate the same, "hence the objection to that effect is hereby rejected."
Stating that, "Court is fully convinced that further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose," the Court allowed the bail plea and imposed certain conditions.
Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Hargun Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General of India, assisted by Ms. Meghna Malik, Central Govt. Counsel for the respondent.
Title: Jaswant Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement