SANJAY KUMAR, ALOK ARADHE
Arvind Dham – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
The offence against the appellant involves provisions related to criminal conspiracy, cheating, breach of trust, and forgery under the Indian Penal Code. Specifically, the allegations include violations of Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating), 406 (criminal breach of trust), and 468 (forgery for the purpose of cheating) (!) .
Additionally, the case involves offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, particularly Section 45, which pertains to the offense of money laundering, and provisions related to the attachment and proceeds of crime (!) .
Therefore, the principal penal sections involved in the offence against the appellant are Sections 120B, 420, 406, and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background on bail application and allegations. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments regarding bail and investigation. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's reasoning on bail considerations. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. court's conclusion and bail order. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT :
ALOK ARADHE, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.08.2025, passed by learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi, by which the application preferred by the appellant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘ BNSS ’) read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA’) seeking grant of regular bail, came to be rejected.
3. The appellant is a former promoter and non-executive Chairman of Amtek Auto Ltd. (AAL), and is also non- executive Director of M/s. ACIL Ltd., a company registered under the Companies Act. The group of companies including subsidiaries and associate concerns is collectively referred to as the “Amtek Group”. During the period 2017-2018, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against entities belonging to Amtek G
Manish Sisodia v. Enforcement Directorate
Padam Chand Jain v. Enforcement Directorate
Udhaw Singh v. Directorate Enforcement
P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan
Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
V. Senthil Balaji v. Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate
Kalvakuntla Kavitha v. Directorate of Enforcement
(1) Bail – Money Laundering – All economic offences cannot be classified into one group as it may involve various activities and may differ from one case to another – Court cannot categorize all offe....
The court underscored that in cases of serious economic offences, the gravity of the allegations and the societal impact outweigh individual rights to bail, especially when considerable evidence indi....
The court emphasized that in economic offences, especially under the PMLA, bail should not be granted unless the accused demonstrates they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The Court emphasized the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, asserting that undue delays in trial violate this right and warrant bail, even for serious offenses.
(1) Economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting economy of country as a whole and ....
In economic offences, bail is not a right; the burden rests on the applicant to show no risk of interference with justice or likelihood of guilt, reinforced by the position of the accused.
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.
Economic offences like money laundering under the PMLA warrant severe scrutiny for bail, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial while recognizing the gravity of the allegations and prolonged detenti....
The court determined that the prosecution must establish a clear link to proceeds of crime to justify denial of bail under PMLA, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.