Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Arvind Singh S/o Lt. Shri Gopal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement Raipur Zonal Office – Respondent
Order :
(Arvind Kumar Verma, J.)
The applicant is seeking release on regular bail under section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Surksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 45 of the PMLA 2002 in connection with ECIR No. RPZO/04/2024 dated 11.04.2024 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement, Raipur (ED), for the offences under Sections 03 and 04 of the PMLA, 2002.
FACTUAL ASPECTS OF THE CASE
2. The applicant was working as an employee of the Bhilai Steel Plant since the year 1995. He has been on Sabbatical leave from 01.04.2020 to 31.03.2023. The Income Tax Department carried out a search and seizure operation on several premises in the State of Chhattisgarh. Subsequent to the aforesaid raids, the IT Department recorded statement of various persons alleged to be part of the liquor syndicate including the applicant.
3. The applicant was arrested on 01.07.2024 by the ED for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 3 & 4 of the PMLA, 2002 in relation to the ECIR 04. This ECIR 04 is identical to the investigation carried out by it previously in relation to another ECIR bearing ECIR No. ECIR/RPZO/11/2022. The applicant was arrested in relation to ECIR 11 and has undergone 10 months of custody
The court held that the applicant failed to satisfy the twin conditions for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002, due to the serious nature of the allegations and the evidence presented.
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.
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.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception, especially in serious economic offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, where the gravity of charges necessitates stringent scrutiny.
The court emphasized that bail under the PMLA requires satisfaction of twin conditions regarding the accused's guilt and likelihood of committing further offences, which were not met in this case.
The court held that the seriousness of economic offences under the PMLA necessitates stringent bail conditions, emphasizing that prolonged incarceration does not automatically warrant bail if substan....
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as there were no reasonable grounds for believing that she had committed an off....
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and prolonged incarceration without trial infringes on this right, warranting bail despite serious allegations.
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
