Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
Bhupesh Arora S/o Shri Gulshan Arora – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement through its Director – Respondent
Bail APPL. No. 4035 of 2025
Decided On : 23-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of bail application and context. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. background context on prior legal matters. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. details on the fraud and involvement of entities. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. arrest details and summary of investigations. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. arguments relating to the legality of arrest. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. arguments against the ed's assertions. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. claims about witness credibility. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. challenging evidence presented by the ed. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 9. discussion on statements of witnesses. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 10. questioning the methods used by the ed. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 11. analysis of the prosecution's chart. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 12. legal stipulations regarding the burden of proof. (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 13. legal principles on presumption of innocence. (Para 55 , 56 , 57) |
| 14. conditions for grant of bail under pmla. (Para 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 15. (Para 61 , 62 , 63) |
| 16. scope of bail conditions. (Para 64 , 65 , 66 , 67) |
| 17. discussion on the scheduled offences. (Para 68 , 69 , 70 , 71) |
| 18. criteria for establishing the nexus. (Para 72 , 73 , 74) |
| 19. role of evidence in determining culpability. (Para 75 , 76 , 77) |
| 20. apprehension for flight risk and operations of the ed. (Para 78 , 79 , 80) |
| 21. ed's position and claim for flight risk. (Para 81 , 82 , 83 , 84) |
| 22. compromise implications on predicate offences. (Para 85 , 86 , 87 , 88) |
| 23. legislative intentions regarding economic offences. (Para 89 , 90 , 91 , 92) |
| 24. discussion on changes in the bail law. (Para 93 , 94 , 95 , 96) |
| 25. ed's powers under the pmla. (Para 97 , 98 , 99 , 100) |
| 26. discrepancy in the proceeds of crime. (Para 101 , 102 , 103 , 104) |
| 27. closing arguments for the defense. (Para 105 , 106 , 107 , 108) |
| 28. ed's rebuttal against the bail plea. (Para 109 , 110 , 111 , 112) |
| 29. conclusions drawn from the evidentiary standards. (Para 113 , 114 , 115 , 116) |
| 30. final determination regarding the bail application. (Para 117 , 118 , 119) |
| 31. contextual framing of the bail application. (Para 120 , 121 , 122 , 123) |
| 32. parameters for evaluating bail permissions. (Para 124 , 125 , 126 , 127) |
| 33. central aspects of the conclusion. (Para 128 , 129 , 130) |
| 34. overview of the court's findings. (Para 131 , 132 , 133) |
| 35. declaration of bail. (Para 134 , 135 , 136 , 137) |
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. First Bail Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C”) read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “ BNSS ”) has been filed on behalf of the Applicant, Bhupesh Arora seeking Regular Bail in ECIR/HYZO/46/2022 dated 14.10.2022 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement (“ED”), registered in Hyderabad Zonal Office under Sections 3 /4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “PMLA”).
2. A Complaint was filed against the Applicant on 27.08.2025 in Delhi and the investigations are complete. The Applicant states that he was arrested on 11.07.2025, in terms of Section 19 of PMLA and since then, he is in Judicial Custody.
3. The Applicant explains that he was in the business of providing gift cards to various Organizations and individual clients, through his Company in the name and style of Freebie Solution Pvt. Ltd. In the year 2022, he along with his family, shifted to Dubai and started Hospitality business therein.
4. On 26.02.2024, FIR No.24/2024 under Section 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “ IPC ”) was registered against unknown persons at P.S. Cyber Crime Central, Faridabad. Since the Applicant was living in Dubai, the Prosecution Agency issued a LOC in order to secure the presence of the Applicant. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana kept the LOC in abeyance from 23.05.2025 to 25.07.2025. The Applicant was arrested in said FIR and was granted 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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA must be satisfied before granting bail in a money laundering case, and the accused's involvement ....
The court emphasized that in economic offences under the PMLA, bail is not granted unless the accused proves they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
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.
Anticipatory bail granted in PMLA case due to agency's sudden coercive action post-arrest of its IO for bribery, prior cooperation shown, no custodial necessity evidenced, twin conditions under Sec 4....
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....
A bail application under PMLA can be granted if the accused demonstrates that there are reasonable grounds for believing they are not guilty and are unlikely to commit further offences while on bail.
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
