Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ujjal Bhuyan, K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.
Sant Kumar Sinha – Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. – Respondents
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.15177-15178/2024 With SLP(Crl) No. 2679/2025 (II-A), SLP(Crl) No. 5905/2025 (II-A)
Decided On : 24-06-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition details and background. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner’s status and ongoing investigation. (Para 3) |
| 3. charges are not yet framed. (Para 4) |
| 4. bail granted based on incarceration duration. (Para 5) |
| 5. disposal of the special leave petitions. (Para 6 , 7) |
ORDER :
SLP(Crl) Nos. 15177-15178/2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Zoheb Hussain, learned standing counsel for the respondent(s)/Enforcement Directorate.
2. These Special Leave Petitions are directed against the orders dated 21.06.2023 and 23.08.2024 passed by the Patna High Court rejecting the bail application of the petitioner.
3. Be it stated that petitioner has been named as an accused in a number of cases involving predicate offence. On that basis, Enforcement Directorate (ED) commenced investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, `PMLA’) whereafter the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) came to be filed. Finally, prosecution complaint was filed by the ED on which cognizance has been taken by the Special Court. In this case, petitioner is in custody in connection with the predicate offence since 29.10.2021.
4. On a query by the Court, learned counsel for the parties have informed that charges have not yet been framed, not to speak of the trial commencing.
5. Having regard to the long incarceration of the petitioner and keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence under PMLA is seven years, we are of the view that present is a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail insofar as the PMLA case is concerned. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner may be produced before the learned Special Court within a maximum period of seven days from today, who shall thereafter release the petitioner on bail on appropriate terms and conditions.
6. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed of.
7. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
SLP(Crl) No. 2679/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Zoheb Hussain, learned standing counsel for the respondent(s)/Enforcement Directorate.
2. This Special Leave Petition is directed against the order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Patna High Court rejecting the bail application of the petitioner.
3. Be it stated that petitioner has been named as an accused in a number of cases involving predicate offence. On that basis, Enforcement Directorate (ED) commenced investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, `PMLA’) whereafter the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) came to be filed. Finally, prosecution complaint was filed by the ED on which cognizance has been taken by the Special Court. In this case, petitioner is in custody in connection with the predicate offence since 07.08.2021.
4. On a query by the Court, learned counsel for the parties have informed that charges have not yet been framed, not to speak of the trial commencing.
5. Having regard to the long incarceration of the petitioner and keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence under PMLA is seven years, we are of the view that present is a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail insofar as the PMLA case is concerned. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner may be produced before the learned Special Court within a maximum period of seven days from today, who shall thereafter release the petitioner on bail on appropriate terms and conditions.
6. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
7. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
SLP(Crl) No. 5905/2025
1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Shri Zoheb Hussain, learned standing counsel for the respondent(s)/Enforcement Directorate.
2. This Special Leave Petition is directed against the order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Patna High Court rejecting the bail application of the petitioner.
3. Be it stated that petitioner has been named as an accused in a number of cases involving predicate offence. On that basis, Enforcement Directorate (ED) commenced investigation under
Prolonged pre-trial detention without charge framing is a significant factor for granting bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, prioritizing liberty in cases of extended custody.
Grant of bail – Merely because for predicated offences charge-sheet might have been filed it cannot be a ground to release accused on bail in connection with scheduled offences under PML Act, 2002.
Prolonged incarceration can lead to bail grant in economic offence cases even under stringent PMLA provisions if no feasible trial timeframe exists.
Accused in money laundering must meet stringent bail conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA, reflecting the severity of the offense and impact on ongoing investigations.
The court considered the duration of custody, the status of other accused, and the appellant's senior citizen status in granting bail.
After cognizance of an offence under PMLA is taken, the Enforcement Directorate cannot arrest the accused, impacting the applicability of bail conditions stipulated in Section 45.
The court emphasized the right to a speedy trial and liberty, allowing bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act after 15 months of custody, citing no likelihood of trial commencement.
The court emphasized the importance of cooperation with the investigation, the gravity of the offense, and the need to balance the fundamental right of personal liberty with the reasonable restrictio....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
