9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1973 - SC - Money LaunderingBail application - predicate offences - constitutional validity of Section 45(1) of the PMLA Act - HELD THAT - The law laid down by this Court on the constitutional validity of Section 45(1) of the PMLA Act in NIKESH TARACHAND SHAH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 2017 (11) TMI 1336 - SUPREME COURT , has not been taken into account. After a detailed discussion on the facts, the High Court opined that prima facie case was made out against the petitioner and, so, he was not entitled for bail. The petitioner was in jail for five months in the predicate offences. A charge sheet has been filed in the case registered under the PMLA Act, though, the learned Additional Solicitor General says that further investigation is in progress - petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court - Bail application allowed.
Issues:
Bail under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Analysis: The Supreme Court considered a case where a First Information Report was registered against the petitioner for various offences, leading to the registration of an Enforcement Case Information Report under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The petitioner had been in jail for five months before being granted bail in the predicate offences. However, the petitioner was arrested again for offences under the PMLA Act, and the High Court had rejected the bail application based on a prima facie case against the petitioner. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court did not consider the constitutional validity of Section 45(1) of the PMLA Act as established in a previous judgment. After reviewing the facts and submissions, the Supreme Court found that the petitioner was entitled to bail considering the circumstances. The Court imposed specific conditions for the bail, including restrictions on the petitioner's interactions related to the case, attendance at court hearings, surrender of passport if applicable, cooperation with the investigating agency, and provision for the Enforcement Directorate to seek modification of the bail conditions if necessary. The Special Leave Petition was disposed of, and any pending applications were also resolved by the Court.
|
