Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the bail appeal of Partha Chatterjee, a former Minister of West Bengal, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on 23 July 2022 in connection with a money laundering case arising from a massive teacher recruitment scam. The scam involved illegal appointments of primary and secondary school teachers, Group C and D staff, through corrupt practices. The ED registered an ECIR based on a CBI FIR alleging that the selection process was manipulated, with answer keys designed to deprive eligible candidates and facilitate backdoor entries. Searches at the premises of the appellant and his close associate led to seizure of cash and gold worth crores, and documents linking the appellant to dummy companies used to launder proceeds of crime. The appellant had been in judicial custody since 5 August 2022. His bail applications before the Trial Court and the High Court were rejected. Before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued for bail on grounds of prolonged incarceration of over two years, his age (72 years), health issues, lack of criminal antecedents, and that he was not named in the predicate offence. He also sought parity with co-accused who were granted bail and claimed entitlement under Section 479 BNSS for having served one-third of the maximum sentence. The ED opposed bail, highlighting the gravity of the offence, the huge amount of proceeds of crime (Rs. 151.2 crores), the appellant's high-ranking position, and the threat to a key witness who expressed fear for her life. The Supreme Court, while acknowledging the importance of personal liberty under Article 21, held that the twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA were not satisfied. The court noted that the statement of the appellant's close associate under Section 50 PMLA prima facie linked him to the bribe money and raised concerns about witness safety. The court also rejected the parity argument, stating that the appellant's position as a minister distinguished him from other accused. On Section 479 BNSS, the court observed that the appellant was not a first-time offender and multiple cases were registered against him, making the provision inapplicable. The court concluded that the societal harm caused by the scam and the risk of tampering with evidence outweighed the right to bail. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant remained in custody.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Bail under PMLA - Section 45 PMLA - Twin Conditions - The appellant, a former Minister, sought bail in a money laundering case arising from a teacher recruitment scam. The court held that the appellant failed to satisfy the twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA, as there were reasonable grounds to believe he was guilty and likely to commit further offences. The statement of a close associate under Section 50 PMLA linking him to proceeds of crime and expressing threat to life weighed against bail. (Paras 10-16) B) Constitutional Law - Right to Personal Liberty - Article 21 - Prolonged Incarceration - The court acknowledged that prolonged incarceration without trial infringes Article 21, but held that statutory embargoes under PMLA must yield only when weighed against liberty. In this case, the gravity of the offence and societal harm outweighed the right to bail. (Paras 13-14) C) Criminal Procedure - Bail under BNSS - Section 479 BNSS - The appellant argued entitlement to bail under Section 479 BNSS having spent one-third of the maximum sentence. The court rejected this, noting that the first proviso excludes first-time offenders and the appellant faces multiple cases, thus Section 479(2) applies. (Paras 11-12) D) Criminal Law - Parity with Co-accused - The appellant sought parity with co-accused who were granted bail. The court held that parity is not automatic, especially when the appellant held a high-ranking position and the co-accused were lower in rank. (Paras 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, considering the twin conditions under Section 45, prolonged incarceration, and the gravity of the offence.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and declined to grant bail to the appellant, holding that he failed to satisfy the twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA and that the gravity of the offence and societal harm outweighed the right to bail.
Law Points
- Bail under PMLA
- Section 45 twin conditions
- prolonged incarceration
- right to personal liberty under Article 21
- parity with co-accused
- Section 479 BNSS
- statement under Section 50 PMLA
- proceeds of crime
