Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Ravi Yallappa Kurbett S/o Ramappa Gowda – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement Ministry Of Finance And Department Of Revenue, Bangalore – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the petition and firs. (Para 1 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments against the charges. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. court's decision and reasoning against bail. (Para 5 , 22) |
| 4. legal principles established in precedents. (Para 18 , 20) |
ORDER :
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.
This petition is filed by accused No.23 under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in ECRI/BGZO/40/2023 dated 30.11.2023 pending on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru in Spl.C.C.No.233/2024 for the offence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short ‘PMLA’)
2. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondent.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that petitioner was not accused when the complaint was filed on the basis of which case in Spl.C.C.No.233/2024 has been registered and it was filed against accused Nos.1 to 22. In the further investigation the petitioner was inquired and he was arrested on 08.07.2025 and additional complaint has been filed against accused Nos.23 to 39 wherein the petitioner has been arraigned as Accused No.23. The allegation against the pet
Bail should not be denied as a form of punishment; however, in cases of money laundering, serious allegations and potential interference with investigations warrant careful consideration against bail....
The court granted bail under the PMLA, emphasizing the lack of sufficient evidence linking the applicant to money laundering, and highlighting the necessity for a predicate offence to substantiate ch....
It is well settled that gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by court while exercising its discretion.
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.
Anticipatory bail under the PMLA requires clear evidence that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences, which was not demonstrated in this case.
The judgment emphasizes the need for substantial probable causes to believe the accused is not guilty, the requirement to prove allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and the presumption of innocence u....
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
