2025 (5) TMI 1458 - SCH - Money Laundering

Multiple supplementary complaints and numerous witnesses - Seeking grant of regular bail - Money Laundering - scheduled/predicate offence - proceeds of crime - collecting commissions and supplying unaccounted liquor to government liquor shops - twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA 2002 are satisfied or not - delay in trial proceedings - HELD THAT - The investigation is in progress. In the predicate offence there are 450 witnesses and the investigation is in progress. Cognizance has not been taken. herefore there is no possibility of the trial commencing in near future. The maximum sentence is of 07 years. Following the law laid down by this Court in the case of V. Senthil Balaji vs. The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement 2024 (9) TMI 1497 - SUPREME COURT the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail pending the trial on appropriate stringent terms and conditions especially when except for the predicate offence there are no antecedents of the appellant brought on record. Hence we direct that the appellant shall be produced before the Special Court within a maximum period of one week from today. The Special Court shall enlarge the appellant on bail on appropriate stringent terms and conditions after hearing the learned counsel for the Enforcement of Directorate. Apart from the conditions which may be imposed by the Special Court there shall be a condition for surrender of passport if any and the condition of regularly and punctually attending the Special Court and cooperating with the Special Court for early conclusion of the trial. The Appeal is accordingly allowed.

Summary

The Supreme Court, in an appeal concerning an ongoing investigation and custody under multiple ECIRs, granted leave and allowed bail to the appellant. The appellant had been in custody for 80 days in relation to an earlier ECIR and was arrested on 8th August 2024 for the present matter, which involves multiple supplementary complaints and numerous witnesses (40 in the current case, 450 in the predicate offence). The Court noted that "cognizance has not been taken" and "there is no possibility of the trial commencing in near future," with a maximum sentence of seven years applicable.Relying on the precedent in *V. Senthil Balaji vs. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement* (2024 INSC 739), the Court held that the appellant "is entitled to be enlarged on bail pending the trial on appropriate stringent terms and conditions," particularly given the absence of antecedents except for the predicate offence. The Court directed that the appellant be produced before the Special Court within one week, which shall grant bail subject to stringent conditions, including surrender of passport and regular attendance and cooperation for expeditious trial conclusion.The appeal was thus allowed, emphasizing balancing custodial detention against the right to bail when trial delays are significant and the offence carries a maximum sentence under seven years.