9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (12) TMI 1317 - HC - Money LaunderingSeeking grant of bail - Money Laundering - proceeds of crime - extortion of crores of Rupees from different rich people by blackmailing them to get their video footage containing objectionable and inappropriate photographs viral - conditions u/s 45 of PMLA satisfied or not - HELD THAT - Taking into consideration the vital aspect of the case which is the pre trial detention of the Petitioner for near about 1 year with uncertainty prevailing about execution of NBWA against co-accused adversely affecting the commencement of the trial and thereby conclusion of trial being not possible in near future and regard being had to the status of the Petitioner as a woman which puts her in the bracket of persons specified in the proviso to Sec. 45 of PMLA allowing her some relaxation in complying the rigor of provision of Section 45 of the PMLA this Court considers that the Petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail. The bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner may be released on bail subject to fulfilment of conditions imposed - bail application allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Non-compliance of Section 19 of PMLA during the arrest of the petitioner. 2. Entitlement to bail under the proviso to Section 45(1) of PMLA due to the petitioner's status as a woman. 3. Consideration of the petitioner's pre-trial detention and the delay in trial commencement. Summary of Judgment: Issue 1: Non-compliance of Section 19 of PMLA during the arrest of the petitioner - The petitioner argued that there was non-compliance with Section 19 of the PMLA during her arrest, which should entitle her to bail. The petitioner was taken into custody on 05.12.2022 and formally arrested on 13.12.2022. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) claimed compliance with the procedural requirements, including oral and written communication of the arrest. However, the court found that the ED did not comply with Section 19(1) of the PMLA immediately or within 24 hours as required, thereby not adhering to the law. Issue 2: Entitlement to bail under the proviso to Section 45(1) of PMLA due to the petitioner's status as a woman - The petitioner sought bail under the proviso to Section 45(1) of the PMLA, arguing that being a woman should grant her bail. The court agreed that the proviso confers discretion on the court to grant bail to women, but it does not automatically entitle them to bail. The court cited the decision in Directorate of Enforcement Vrs. Preeti Chandra, which supports the discretionary nature of the proviso. Issue 3: Consideration of the petitioner's pre-trial detention and the delay in trial commencement - The court considered the petitioner's pre-trial detention of nearly one year and the uncertainty of trial commencement due to the inability to apprehend co-accused. The court emphasized the importance of securing the attendance of the accused and the petitioner's compliance with the tripod test (flight risk, tampering of evidence, and influencing witnesses). Given the circumstances, the court found that the petitioner had demonstrated a case for relaxation of Section 45(1) of the PMLA and granted bail. Conclusion: The bail application of the petitioner was allowed on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two local solvent sureties. The court imposed several conditions, including not committing any offence while on bail, appearing before the court on every date of posting, depositing her passport, informing the court and ED of her residence, and cooperating with the ED. The court clarified that the trial would proceed independently of the observations made for the bail application, and the court in seisin of the case could cancel the bail if conditions were violated. Additional Conditions: 1. The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail and shall not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. 2. The petitioner shall appear before the court on every date of posting and may face proceedings under Section 229-A of IPC if she fails to appear. 3. The petitioner shall deposit her passport with the court until the trial concludes. 4. The petitioner shall inform the court and ED of her residence and contact details and shall not change her mobile number without informing the court. 5. The court may initiate proceedings under Section 174-A of IPC if the petitioner misuses bail and fails to appear after a proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. 6. The petitioner shall appear before the ED as required and cooperate with the investigation. The court clarified that the order should not be construed as a final opinion on the merits of the case, and the trial would proceed independently. The BLAPL was disposed of accordingly.
|
