2021 (4) TMI 1304 - HC - Money Laundering

Grant of bail - bail sought on medical grounds specifically u/s 45 of PMLA Act - HELD THAT - On perusal of the application for bail preferred by respondent no.1 it is apparent that the application is primarily on merits with averments relating to his health condition as reflected in paragraph 13 of the application. It is also apparent that on account of the grievance of respondent no.1 with regards to his health condition report was called for by the Special Court. The report was received. Pursuant to that permanent bail was granted to respondent no.1 pending trial. The order granting bail refers to compliance report submitted by Jail authority about the health condition of respondent no.1 - On perusal of the compliance report with regards to the health of applicant it can be seen that after making observations about his ailment it was stated that the accused had an appointment for CT Scan on 7th April 2021. He is taking medicine for asthama anxiety APD and Hematuria and once CT scan is done the Court will be informed about its outcome. However the Court proceeded to grant permanent bail pending trial to respondent no.1. The respondent no.1 can be examined by Medical Board consisting of Neurologist Endocrinologist and General Physician and report thereof be submitted to this Court on 19th April 2021 - Application disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to bail order granted on medical grounds by Special Judge in PMLA case.

Analysis:
1. The Directorate of Enforcement challenged the bail order granted to the respondent on medical grounds by the Special Judge in a PMLA case. The respondent had applied for bail citing health reasons, including anxiety, asthma, acid reflux, slip disc, and shoulder pain. The Special Judge granted bail based on the medical condition of the respondent, despite limited averments in the bail application regarding health issues. The applicant argued that bail should be granted only after considering the merits of the case, as per Section 45 of the PMLA Act. The applicant also requested the respondent to be examined by a Medical Board to be formed by the Dean of J.J. Hospital, Mumbai, and for a report to be submitted to the Court.

2. The respondent's counsel argued that there was no perversity in the Special Judge's order granting bail on medical grounds. The Court had considered reports from jail authorities regarding the respondent's health condition, including visits to J.J. Hospital for medical issues. The respondent's counsel contended that bail should not be cancelled unless in exceptional circumstances, citing legal precedents. The respondent's counsel emphasized that the bail order was not surprising, as medical reports had been submitted to the Court as per previous orders.

3. The High Court analyzed the facts and submissions from both sides. It noted that the bail application primarily focused on merits, with health conditions mentioned in passing. The Court observed that the Special Judge had granted permanent bail to the respondent pending trial based on the medical reports submitted by jail authorities. The High Court agreed with the alternative submission by the applicant's counsel to have the respondent examined by a Medical Board comprising specialists and directed the Dean of J.J. Hospital to form the Board. The Court ordered the respondent to be produced before the Medical Board for examination and for a health report to be submitted by a specified date.

4. In conclusion, the High Court set aside the bail order granted by the Special Judge and directed further medical examination of the respondent by a Medical Board. The Court ordered the respondent to be produced before the Board and for a health report to be submitted by a specific date. The order keeping the bail in abeyance was to continue until the health report submission date. The Court emphasized the importance of a thorough medical examination before making decisions based on health grounds in legal proceedings.