Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in PMLA Case Due to Long Incarceration and Delayed Trial. Prolonged custody without trial violates Article 21; twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA not an absolute bar.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Vijay Narendra Kumar Kothari, filed a bail application under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), in connection with ECIR/05/MBZO/2016 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement. This was his second bail application; the first was rejected on 29 November 2019. The applicant argued that co-accused Sanjay Jain and Saurabh Pandit had been granted bail on 2 May 2018 and 4 October 2018 respectively, and that he had been in custody since March 2019. He contended that the investigation was complete and trial was unlikely to commence soon, thus his continued detention was unjustified. The respondent opposed bail, citing the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA. The court, after hearing arguments, noted that the applicant had been in custody for over two years and that the trial had not yet begun. Relying on the principle of right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, the court held that prolonged incarceration without trial warranted bail. The court also considered the bail orders of co-accused and the order in Deepak Kochar v. Directorate of Enforcement. The court granted bail subject to conditions including furnishing a PR bond of Rs. 5,00,000 with one or two sureties, surrendering passport, and reporting to the investigating officer periodically.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Bail - Money Laundering - Sections 3, 4, 45 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Long Incarceration - Applicant in custody since March 2019; trial not likely to commence soon - Court held that prolonged incarceration without trial violates right to speedy trial under Article 21, and twin conditions under Section 45 are not absolute bar - Bail granted on conditions (Paras 1-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, considering the twin conditions under Section 45 and the prolonged custody without trial.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Bail granted subject to conditions: (i) PR bond of Rs. 5,00,000 with one or two sureties; (ii) surrender passport; (iii) report to investigating officer on first Monday of every month; (iv) not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses; (v) not leave India without court permission.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Money Laundering
  • PMLA
  • Section 45
  • Twin Conditions
  • Long Incarceration
  • Right to Speedy Trial
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (BOM) (04) 39

Bail Application No.1437 of 2020

2021-04-07

Sandeep K. Shinde

Dr. Sujay Kantawala, Mr. Sujit Sahoo, Mr. Aditya Talpade, Mr. H.S. Venegaonkar, Mr. S.R. Agarkar

Vijay Narendra Kumar Kothari

Directorate of Enforcement, State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Bail application in a money laundering case under PMLA

Remedy Sought

Enlargement on bail by the applicant

Filing Reason

Applicant sought bail due to long custody and delayed trial

Previous Decisions

First bail application rejected on 29 November 2019; co-accused Sanjay Jain granted bail on 2 May 2018; co-accused Saurabh Pandit granted bail on 4 October 2018

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under PMLA considering the twin conditions under Section 45 Whether prolonged incarceration without trial violates right to speedy trial under Article 21

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant argued that co-accused were granted bail and he has been in custody since March 2019; investigation is over and trial not likely to commence soon. Respondent opposed bail citing twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA.

Ratio Decidendi

Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, and the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA are not an absolute bar to bail when the trial is delayed.

Judgment Excerpts

Applicant is in custody since March, 2019 and since investigation is over and trial is not likely to commence in near future, applicant be released on bail. Prolonged incarceration without trial violates right to speedy trial under Article 21.

Procedural History

First bail application rejected on 29 November 2019; second bail application filed in 2020; heard on 9 March 2021 and 17 March 2021; order pronounced on 7 April 2021.

Acts & Sections

  • Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002: 3, 4, 45
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurance Company Appeals in Motor Accident Claims Under Section 163 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Structured Formula Compensation Based on Disability Certificate Cannot Be Challenged by Insurer. Consent Awards Are Final...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Appellants in Grievous Hurt Case. Cousins convicted under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC for attacking victims with dangerous weapons, sentence of 7 years rigorous imprisonment confirmed.