2025 (4) TMI 14 - HC - Money Laundering

Money Laundering - seeking grant of interim bail due to the critical medical condition of his father - HELD THAT - Nominal Roll dated 27.03.2025 reflects that the Petitioner has no criminal antecedents and his jail conduct during the last one year is Satisfactory - However today the condition of the Father of the Petitioner is stated to be critical and deteriorating very quickly. The factum of his Father being on a ventilator in the ICU has been verified by the Respondent as also the medical condition of the Father being critical. In these prevailing circumstances and on humanitarian grounds the Petitioner is granted interim Bail for a period of 10 days from the date of his release subject to Petitioner s fulfilment of conditions imposed - the petition is disposed of.

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal issues considered in this judgment include:

Whether the petitioner should be granted interim bail on humanitarian grounds due to the critical medical condition of his father.
The impact of the petitioner's previous conduct and compliance with bail conditions on the current application for interim bail.
The consideration of potential risks associated with granting bail, such as tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
The legal framework governing the grant of interim bail under the Bharatiya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

1. Grant of Interim Bail on Humanitarian Grounds

Relevant legal framework and precedents: The application for interim bail is considered under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, read with Section 483 of the same Act, and Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The legal framework allows for consideration of bail applications based on humanitarian grounds, particularly in cases of severe medical emergencies within the applicant's family.
Court's interpretation and reasoning: The court acknowledged the critical medical condition of the petitioner's father, who is suffering from Stage-4 Brain Cancer and is on a ventilator in the ICU. The court recognized the humanitarian aspect of the request, noting the petitioner's familial responsibilities and the absence of other immediate family members who could provide adequate care.
Key evidence and findings: The court took into account the medical certificate issued by the Consultant, Medical Oncology, confirming the critical condition of the petitioner's father. The certificate detailed the father's deteriorating health and need for intensive care.
Application of law to facts: The court applied the humanitarian provisions of the relevant legal framework to the facts, emphasizing the need for the petitioner to attend to his father during a critical period.
Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent's argument against granting bail was based on the petitioner's previous non-compliance with bail conditions and potential risks of tampering with evidence. However, the court found that the immediate humanitarian need outweighed these concerns, provided strict conditions were imposed.
Conclusions: The court concluded that interim bail for 10 days was justified on humanitarian grounds, subject to stringent conditions to mitigate any risks of non-compliance or interference with the judicial process.

2. Previous Conduct and Compliance with Bail Conditions

Relevant legal framework and precedents: The court considered the petitioner's previous conduct during prior bail periods, including compliance with surrender orders and adherence to bail conditions.
Court's interpretation and reasoning: The court acknowledged the petitioner's delayed surrender in the past and the concerns raised by the respondent regarding potential non-compliance. However, it also noted the petitioner's satisfactory jail conduct and lack of criminal antecedents.
Key evidence and findings: The nominal roll reflecting the petitioner's satisfactory conduct in jail over the past year was noted as a mitigating factor.
Application of law to facts: While previous non-compliance was a concern, the court balanced this against the petitioner's current situation and the humanitarian grounds presented.
Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent's concerns about non-compliance were addressed by imposing strict conditions on the interim bail, ensuring the petitioner's accountability and limiting his ability to interfere with the investigation.
Conclusions: The court determined that the petitioner's previous conduct, while a factor, did not preclude the granting of interim bail under the present circumstances, provided safeguards were implemented.

3. Potential Risks of Granting Bail

Relevant legal framework and precedents: The court considered the potential risks associated with granting bail, such as tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, as outlined in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Court's interpretation and reasoning: The court acknowledged these risks but found that they could be mitigated by imposing specific conditions on the petitioner's interim bail.
Key evidence and findings: The court noted the respondent's verification of the petitioner's father's critical condition, which weighed heavily in favor of granting bail despite potential risks.
Application of law to facts: The court applied legal principles to balance the need for humanitarian relief with the necessity of maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
Treatment of competing arguments: The court addressed the respondent's concerns by setting conditions to prevent any interference with the investigation, such as restricting the petitioner's movement and requiring daily reporting to the police.
Conclusions: The court concluded that the risks could be effectively managed through conditions imposed on the interim bail, allowing the petitioner to attend to his father while ensuring compliance with legal obligations.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning: The court stated, "In these prevailing circumstances and on humanitarian grounds, the Petitioner is granted interim Bail for a period of 10 days from the date of his release, subject to Petitioner furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 Lakhs, with two sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court / CMM / Duty Magistrate."
Core principles established: The judgment reinforces the principle that humanitarian grounds, particularly critical medical conditions of family members, can justify interim bail, provided that adequate safeguards are in place to prevent abuse of the bail process.
Final determinations on each issue: The court granted interim bail for 10 days with specific conditions, including restrictions on movement, mandatory daily reporting to the police, and prohibitions on contacting witnesses or tampering with evidence. The decision emphasized that these measures were necessary to balance humanitarian needs with legal obligations.