2024 (2) TMI 260 - SCH - Money Laundering

Seeking grant of bail - Money Laundering - huge quantity of gold has been recovered from the petitioner - Section 45 of the PMLA - HELD THAT - In an appeal arising out of predicate offences the petitioner was granted bail by the High Court on 20.07.2022. Indisputably, the said order has not been challenged. In the present offence also, the accused Sukhpal Singh Khaira has already been granted bail. It is also considered Section 45 of the PMLA and find that in the facts and circumstances of the present case the rigor of the said section are duly satisfied more particularly looking to the custody period and parity of the petitioner s case with that of Sukhpal Singh Khaira. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The conditions of granting bail would be same as imposed by the High Court in the order dated 27.01.2022 passed in CRM-M No.51885/2021 in the case of Sukhpal Singh Khaira - SLP disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The petition for grant of bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) based on the petitioner's incarceration and the recovery of a significant amount of gold, with reference to the main accused being granted bail in the same offence.

Judgment Summary:

Issue 1 - Bail Petition under PMLA:
The petitioner filed a bail petition citing his incarceration for nearly one and a half years during the appeal process for a conviction in the predicate offence. The senior counsel for the petitioner highlighted that the main accused had already been granted bail in the same offence. On the other hand, the respondent vehemently opposed the petition, emphasizing serious allegations against the petitioner and a substantial recovery of gold from him. The Court noted that the petitioner had been granted bail by the High Court in the appeal arising from predicate offences, which remained unchallenged. Considering the provisions of Section 45 of the PMLA and the circumstances of the case, including the custody period and the parity with the main accused, bail was granted to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to be released on bail in connection with the Complaint Case, with conditions similar to those imposed in the case of the main accused.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court disposed of the special leave petition by granting bail to the petitioner and directed his release in connection with the specified case, maintaining conditions akin to those set by the High Court for the main accused. Any pending applications were also deemed disposed of as a part of this judgment.