Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in PMLA Case on Ground of Long Incarceration and Medical Condition. The court held that the applicant, who had completed half of the maximum punishment of 7 years and was suffering from stage 4 colon cancer, was entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC read with Section 45 PMLA.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 597
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Suryaji Pandurang Jadhav, filed a regular bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in connection with ECIR/MB/ZO-II/03/2020 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement. The scheduled offence was FIR No. 0026/2020 registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, Pune for offences under Sections 420, 406, 408, 409, 465, 468, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, relating to alleged siphoning of Rs. 71.78 Crore from Shivajirao Bhosale Sahakari Bank Ltd. The applicant was arrested in the scheduled offence on 24.02.2020 and in the ECIR on 05.03.2021. He had been granted bail in the scheduled offence on 02.03.2023. The applicant submitted that he had undergone 3 years and 6 months in the PMLA case, which is half of the maximum punishment of 7 years, and was in custody for over 4 years and 7 months. He also cited his age of 72 years and stage 4 colon cancer. The ED opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The court, considering the long incarceration, the right to speedy trial under Article 21, and the medical condition, allowed the bail application.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Bail under PMLA - Section 45 PMLA - Twin Conditions - Long Incarceration - The applicant sought bail after completing half of the maximum punishment of 7 years, having been in custody for over 4 years and 7 months. The court considered the right to speedy trial under Article 21 and Section 436A CrPC. Held that the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of long incarceration and medical condition (Paras 2-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC read with Section 45 PMLA on the ground of long incarceration and medical condition.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail on such terms and conditions as the court may deem fit.

Law Points

  • Bail under PMLA
  • Section 45 PMLA
  • twin conditions
  • long incarceration
  • right to speedy trial
  • Article 21
  • Section 436A CrPC
  • medical grounds
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (9) 192

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2023 OF 2023

2024-09-19

Madhav J. Jamdar, J.

2024:BHC-AS:37345

Mr. Aabad Ponda, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Prashant Patil, Mr. Swapnil Ambure, Ms. Nida Khan & Ms. Poorva Joshi, for the Applicant; Mr. Shriram Shirsat a/w. Ms. Karishma Singh, APP, for Respondent No. 1 – ED; Ms. Veera Shinde, APP, for Respondent No. 2 – State

Suryaji Pandurang Jadhav

The Directorate of Enforcement, Worli & anr.

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

Nature of Litigation

Bail application under Section 439 CrPC read with Section 45 PMLA in a money laundering case.

Remedy Sought

The applicant sought regular bail in ECIR/MB/ZO-II/03/2020 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement.

Filing Reason

The applicant was arrested in connection with a scheduled offence involving siphoning of Rs. 71.78 Crore from a cooperative bank and subsequent money laundering charges.

Previous Decisions

The applicant was granted bail in the scheduled offence by a learned Single Judge on 02.03.2023 in B. A. No. 2006 of 2021.

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of long incarceration (over 4 years 7 months) and having completed half of the maximum punishment of 7 years. Whether the right to speedy trial under Article 21 and Section 436A CrPC entitles the applicant to bail. Whether the applicant's medical condition (stage 4 colon cancer) and age (72 years) are grounds for bail.

Submissions/Arguments

The applicant submitted that he has undergone 3 years 6 months in PMLA case, half of the maximum punishment of 7 years, and is in custody for over 4 years 7 months. He relied on judgments including Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh, Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, Manish Sisodia, and others. He also cited his age and medical condition. The ED opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence and that the twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA are not satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi

The right to speedy trial under Article 21 and Section 436A CrPC, coupled with long incarceration and medical condition, can override the stringent conditions under Section 45 PMLA for grant of bail.

Judgment Excerpts

He submitted that the Applicant is incarcerated for more than 4 years and 7 months. He submits that in PMLA Case, the Applicant has completed 3 years and 6 months on 05.09.2024. He submitted that the factual position on record clearly shows that the said fundamental right of the Applicant is violated. He also submitted that the Applicant is 72 years old and suffering from stage 4 of colon cancer.

Procedural History

The applicant was arrested in the scheduled offence on 24.02.2020 and in the ECIR on 05.03.2021. He was granted bail in the scheduled offence on 02.03.2023. The present bail application was filed on an unspecified date and heard on 19.09.2024.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 439, 436A
  • Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002: 45, 3, 70, 2(1)(y)
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 420, 34, 406, 408, 409, 465, 468, 471
  • Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act: 3, 4, 5
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses State's Petition Against Tribunal Order in Service Transfer Dispute - Transfer Order Set Aside for Non-Compliance with Earlier Tribunal Direction and Lack of Proper Posting
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal by Dissenting Members in Cooperative Housing Society Redevelopment Dispute — Majority Decision Upheld. Court holds that minority members cannot stall redevelopment process approved by 80 out of 88 members, and obj...