The court determined that the prosecution must establish a clear link to proceeds of crime to justify denial of bail under PMLA, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial.

JUDGMENT :

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

1. This is an application for grant of regular bail filed on behalf of applicant in case FIR No. 45/2022 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act [“PMLA”] registered at Police Station EOW.

Brief Facts of the case:

2. The case arises from FIR No. 45/2022 dated 16.03.2022 registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Delhi, based on a complaint by Chartered Accountant Mr. Vikash Mohpal that forged Form 15CB certificates bearing his credentials were being used to facilitate foreign remittances through banks, mainly ICICI Bank. These certificates were falsely shown as supporting outward remittances for freight, logistics, and import payments. Since the offences under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code [“ IPC ”] are scheduled offences under the PMLA, the Directorate of Enforcement [“ED”] registered an ECIR vide ECIR/DLZO-II/24/202 on 28^th March, 2022.

3. Investigation by the respondent agency revealed that several Indian entities fraudulently remitted approximately Rs. 696.69 crore to overseas entities in Singapore and Hong Kong. The remittances were based on forged Form 15CB and Form 15CA certificates and were falsely declared as legitimate business payments. These Indian entities had no genuine business operations and existed only on paper. Their directors and proprietors were fictitious or untraceable, and the incorporation and KYC documents were found to be forged.

4. Further investigation showed that many of these Indian entities shared common addresses, directors, and bank accounts confirming their sham nature. Bank accounts were opened across multiple banks and funded through RTGS, NEFT, and other channels to layer the proceeds of crime. The funds were then siphoned abroad to overseas entities to conceal their origin and evade regulatory scrutiny, thereby constituting large-scale money laundering.

Role of Applicant-Amit Aggarwal

5. The applicant, Amit Aggarwal (Accused No. 21), along with Rahul Kumar (Accused No. 6), was identified as the kingpin and principal mastermind behind the operation. He controlled and operated the Indian shell entities and coordinated fraudulent outward remittances to 16 overseas entities in Singapore and Hong Kong. To conceal his identity, he operated under the alias name “Ravi Mehra” while dealing with banks, professionals, and associates, and played a key role in procuring and misusing Form 15CB certificates, which were later forged to justify illegal remittances.

6. Amit Aggarwal also orchestrated the generation and laundering of proceeds of crime by routing funds through multiple Indian bank accounts and subsequently remitting them abroad under the guise of legitimate transactions. The illicit proceeds were concealed and layered by channeling funds into the bank accounts of his wife and mother, and by acquiring immovable properties and funding family- controlled entities. The directors of the dummy companies as well as the complainant categorically disclosed in their statements that it was the applicant who approached them and concocted the whole elaborate scheme.

Submissions of the Applicant:

7. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case. Furthermore, that the Applicant has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offence relating to the use of forged and fabricated Forms 15CA/CB for foreign remittances under Rule 37AA of the Income Tax Rules. The Applicant is neither a director, partner, proprietor, shareho