JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Mirajkar, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. Venegavkar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1.- E.D.

2. At the outset, learned Counsel for the applicant has prayed for release of the applicant on bail mainly on the premise that he has undergone 2 years and 340 days in the custody as an under trial prisoner in light of the fact that the maximum sentence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short “PML Act”) is 3 years. The charge has not yet been framed and that the prospects of the trial commencing in time in the near future is bleak. As such, dehors merits, Counsel prays for release of the applicant only on the ground of inordinate delay in commencing the trial.

3. A few facts germane for disposal of this application are as follows.

4. The applicant came to be arrested by the Enforcement of Directorate on 27.11.2020. Before his arrest, on 07.03.2020 CBI filed an FIR (RC No.219 of 2020) at New Delhi against Cox & Kind Group of Companies (for short “CKL”) and others alleging a bank fraud. CKL was in insolvency since 2019. Forensic audit revealed serious financial misconduct. The applicant filed a complaint on 19.08.2020 for such financial misconduct against the CFO and other senior executives of CKL at Nagpada Police Station, Mumbai, which were registered as C.R. No.3/2020 and 4/2020 after orders under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Another case was opened by the Enforcement Directorate at Mumbai being No. 38 of 2020. Subsequently, CFO and internal auditor of CKL were arrested in the month of September / October 2020. Before his arrest, the applicant attended the office of the Enforcement Directorate on several occasions for the purpose of investigation. The Enforcement Directorate filed a complaint for the offence under Section 4 of the PML Act in Special Court, Mumbai on 02.12.2020, which is registered as Special Case No.1090 of 2020. An application moved for bail by the applicant came to be rejected on 29.04.2021 after considering the merits of the case.

5. The applicant has moved the present application on 03.06.2021. The Special Court granted temporary bail to enable the applicant to undergo medical treatment at his own cost at Bombay Hospital, subject to his custody in other cases registered with the Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai. The applicant moved 8 applications for bail on medical ground being Bail Application Nos. 2723 of 2023, 2730 of 2023, 2729 of 2023, 2728 of 2023, 2727 of 2023, 2733 of 2023, 2725 of 2023 and 2724 of 2023. This Court had also permitted the applicant to take medical treatment by an order dated 16.03.2023. However, subsequently by an order dated 02.11.2023, this Court rejected the prayer of the applicant seeking continuation of the medical bail on the ground of his serious health issues as well as unfavourable medical history, which finds a mention in the certificates issued by one Dr. Pravin Amin dated 24.08.2023.

6. No doubt, right of an under trial prisoner to have a speedy trial is one of the facets of Article 21 of the Constitution of India being a fundamental right. Mr. Venegavkar, learned Special Public Prosecutor has contended that in view of Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the right to be released on bail would be accrued to the applicant on the day when half of the maximum period of imprisonment, specified under Section 4 of the PML Act would be over. Mr. Venegavkar has, therefore, placed useful reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 2022 SCC Online SC 929. It would be apposite to extract paragraph 416, 417 and 418 of the judgment, which read thus :-

“416. The Union of India also recognized the right to speedy trial and access to justice as fundamental right in their written submissions and, thus, submitted that in a limited situation right of bail can be granted in case of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. Furt