The first proviso to Section 45(1) of the PMLA relaxes the strict twin-condition requirement for women, allowing courts to consider bail applications based on general judicial principles while considering the gravity of the offence and evidence on record.

JUDGMENT

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

1. The applicant has approached this Court, seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of ECIR No. ECIR/HIU-II/24/2025, recorded by the Directorate of Enforcement [hereafter ‘DoE’] for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [hereafter ‘PMLA’].

Factual Background

2. Succinctly, it is the case of the DoE that one FIR No. 91/2016 was registered on 16.11.2016 at Police Station Phase-8, SAS Nagar, Mohali, for commission of offence under Sections 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter ‘IPC’] against accused Amit Gupta @ Nageshwar Gupta and other co-accused persons (including applicant herein). The allegations in the said FIR are that the accused persons had duped the complainant and her family members of an amount of approximately ₹6 crores on the pretext of offering the complainant the role of a lead actress in a film and inducing her to invest money in the production of the said film. It is further the case of prosecution that a charge-sheet has already been filed in the aforesaid FIR and that accused Amit Gupta @ Nageshwar Gupta was declared a proclaimed person vide order dated 21.10.2024 passed by the learned JMFC, SAS Nagar, Mohali. It is stated that the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC is a scheduled offence under the PMLA, and on the said basis, the present ECIR being ECIR/HIU-II/24/2025 dated 11.08.2025 was recorded for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA.

3. According to the DoE, the present applicant, Sandeepa Virk, was engaged in creating undue influence by misrepresenting herself and allegedly duping various persons by inducing them to part with money. It is alleged that the applicant used a fake e-commerce website for the purposes of money laundering and claimed herself to be the owner of the website hyboocare.com, which purportedly sold FDA-approved beauty products and reflected its registered address as WZ-44/1, Street No. 13, Krishna Puri, Krishna Park, Old Mahavir Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi. It is alleged that upon verification, the products listed on the said website were found to be fake. It is further alleged that accused Amit Gupta @ Nageshwar Gupta and the applicant herein utilized the proceeds of crime generated from the aforesaid scheduled offence to acquire immovable properties, including Flat No. 2103 situated in Mumbai, which was allegedly acquired jointly in the names of Amit Gupta @ Nageshwar Gupta, the applicant Sandeepa Virk, and one Kamla, and later transferred completely in the name of applicant. The DoE has further alleged that the applicant utilized part of the proceeds of crime, directly and indirectly, to finance her alleged luxurious lifestyle, travel expenses, and for the purchase of two additional immovable properties situated at Krishna Park, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi. It is also the case of the DoE that the applicant destroyed her mobile phone, which constituted material evidence in the present matter, and thereby committed an act amounting to destruction of evidence. On the aforesaid allegations, it is asserted that the applicant actively participated in the process and activities connected with the offence of money laundering and was knowingly involved in the acquisition, possession, and use of the proceeds of crime, as well as in projecting or claiming the same as untainted property, thereby committing the offence of money laundering as defined under Section 3 of the PMLA, punishable under Section 4 thereof.

4. The applican