After Kejriwal, Supreme Court Grants Interim Bail To Another PMLA Accused For Contesting Elections; Clarifies Order Not To Be Treated As Precedent
After granting similar relief in Arvind Kejriwal's case, the Supreme Court today granted interim bail to one Subhash Prasad Yadav - accused in a money laundering case - for the purpose of contesting Jharkhand Assembly elections. The election being scheduled for November 13, Yadav has been directed to be released till November 14, on which date he shall surrender before jail authorities by 5...
After granting similar relief in Arvind Kejriwal's case, the Supreme Court today granted interim bail to one Subhash Prasad Yadav - accused in a money laundering case - for the purpose of contesting Jharkhand Assembly elections. The election being scheduled for November 13, Yadav has been directed to be released till November 14, on which date he shall surrender before jail authorities by 5 pm.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order in Yadav's challenge to a Patna High Court order. Earlier, the Court had orally instructed that proof in support of Yadav's claim that he is contesting the Jharkhand Assembly elections (from Rashtriya Janata Dal) be shown.
Yesterday, Senior Advocate SB Upadhyay, for Yadav, informed that the requisite documents had been filed. However, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, for Enforcement Directorate, vehemently objected to the prayers and was granted time till today to respond.
Today, the ASG argued that Yadav is guilty of suppression. When the Bench referred to Afzal Ansari's case (where a BSP MP's conviction was stayed, paving way for restoration of his Lok Sabha membership and enabling him to contest next elections), the ASG replied that a good case has to be made out on facts for such relief. He contended that Section 45 PMLA imposes fetters on grant of interim bail and campaigning for elections cannot be a yardstick on which Courts grant interim bail.
The ASG further alleged that Yadav obtained the order to be allowed to file nomination without making ED a party and the said order was recalled subsequently.
The bench commented that the Returning Officer should have cancelled Yadav's nomination, but now the situation is different because Yadav has been permitted to contest. It acknowledged that the ASG's apprehension regarding opening of floodgates (if bail is granted for elections) may be valid. However, Yadav has not been convicted yet and there is a presumption of innocence in his favor.
The order was dictated thus:
"Taking into consideration the fact that the regular bail application filed by the petitioner is pending before the High Court, we do not express any opinion on merits of the said prayer. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail till 14th November, 2024 subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Special Judge before whom the trial is pending. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the jail authorities before 5 PM on 14th November. The High Court is requested to take up the petitioner's regular bail application in due course of time and at the earliest. It goes without saying that the interim bail order shall have no bearing on petitioner's claim to regular bail."
The bench clarified that its order in the present case shall not be treated as a precedent.
Background
Reportedly, 19 FIRs were initially registered against one Broadson Commodities Pvt Ltd. Thereafter, the Enforcement Directorate registered an ECIR on the basis of the FIRs in 2023.
The allegation against the accused was that they engaged in illegal sand mining, without issuance of e-transit challans, and caused loss of revenue to the government. It was further claimed that the accused generated and acquired proceeds of crime by commission of the alleged offenses.
After completing investigation, ED filed a complaint against Yadav (and 2 others) and the Special Court took cognizance of the same. Yadav was arrested by ED on March 9, 2024 and he is currently lodged in a Patna jail.
Apparently, Yadav filed nomination as a candidate for Jharkhand assembly elections and moved a bail application before the Patna High Court for enabling him to campaign for elections.
However, the chances of hearing of his bail plea, prior to date of elections (13 November) turned out to be bleak. As such, Yadav filed a writ petition before the High Court, but the same was dismissed.
"it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has already filed a regular bail application before this Court which is still pending and knowing this fact, petitioner has filed the present Criminal Writ Application for interim bail for campaigning in the Election, therefore, it is not just and proper for this Bench to pass any order in favour of the petitioner", the High Court said.
Assailing the dismissal order, Yadav approached the Supreme Court. In support of his prayers, he relies on the decision rendered in Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, where the Aam Aadmi Party chief was granted interim bail by the Supreme Court itself and not relegated to the trial Court.
It is worthwhile to add that in 2019, Yadav unsuccessfully contested election from Chatra Lok Sabha constituency in Jharkhand on the ticket of RJD.
The petition was filed through Advocate-on-Record Pankaj Bhagat.
Case Title: SUBHASH PRASAD YADAV Versus THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., SLP(Crl) No. 15145/2024