To establish a money laundering offence, foundational facts must be proven, including involvement with 'proceeds of crime' and clear evidence against the accused. Bail granted due to lack of evidence.

ORDER :

S Vishwajith Shetty, J.

Accused No.2 in ECIR/BGZO/05/2025 registered by the Additional Directorate, Directorate of Enforcement, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, 'PML Act') pending before the Court of Principal City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru is before this Court under Section 4 83 of BNSS , 2023 seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. The petitioner was working as a General Manager of the Karnataka Bhovi Development Corporation (herein after referred to as 'Corporation' for short) for the period between 05.04.2021 to 01.07.2022. FIR was registered before the various Police Stations in the State against the management and employees of the Corporation alleging that there was misappropriation of funds belonging to the Corporation and particulars of the said FIRs as follows:

4. The respondent subsequently initiated proceedings under Section 19 of the PML Act and ECIR/BGZO/05/2025 was registered against three persons for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PML Act and the petitioner herein is arraigned as accused no.2 in the said case. It is alleged that, aforesaid four FIRs were registered for the offences punishable under Section 4 20 and 120B of IPC etc., which are the scheduled offences and utilising the proceeds of the crime, properties were derived/obtained by the accused, which amounted to offence punishable under Section 4 of the PML Act.

5. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 05.04.2025 and subsequently he was remanded to judicial custody. The bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional sessions Court was rejected on 28.05.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that charge sheet has not been filed till date in the criminal cases registered for the predicate offences. The petitioner was the person, who initially had submitted a complaint to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the Karnataka State about the fraud and misappropriation of funds committed by the officials of the Corporation. The complaint by the petitioner was much prior to the registration of the aforesaid 4 FIRs for predicate offence. The petitioner is now implicated falsely in the present case.

7. During the course of investigation in the present case, no material has been recovered from the petitioner which would prima-facie make out the alleged offence against him. The properties, which have been attached in the present case were purchased by the petitioner, much prior to he taking charge as a General Manager in the Corporation. He submits that, except the confession statement of the co-accused in the criminal case registered for predicate offences, there is no other material collected against the petitioner in the present case. Investigation of the case is already completed and final report/complaint has been filed before the jurisdictional Court by the respondent. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

8. Per contra learned counsel appearing for the respondent referring to S