JUDGMENT :

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.

By way of the present petition filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner seeks regular bail in ECIR/STF/17/2022 dated 21.09.2022 registered under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (‘IPC’) and sections 17/18/18- B/20/38/39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 (‘UAPA’). The petitioner has been arraigned as accused No. 30 in the 7^th Supplementary Prosecution Complaint dated 01.05.2025 (‘7^th SPC’) that came to be filed in the subject ECIR inter-alia under sections 44/45 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act 2002 (‘PMLA’) for the commission of offences under sections 3/4/70 of the PMLA.

2. Notice on the present petition was issued vidé order dated 14.10.2025.

3. Pursuant thereto counter-affidavit under cover of Index dated 24.11.2025 has been filed on behalf of respondent, Enforcement Directorate (‘ED’).

4. Nominal Roll dated 18.02.2026 has been received from the concerned Jail Superintendent.

5. In support of their submissions, the petitioner and respondent have filed Written Submission dated 18.02.2026 and Note dated 19.03.2026, respectively.

6. The court has heard Mr. Adit S. Pujari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; and Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned Special Counsel and Mr. Vivek Gurnani, learned Panel Counsel appearing on behalf of the ED.

BRIEF BACKGROUND

7. The subject ECIR was registered on the basis of FIR bearing No. RC-14/2022/NIA/DLI dated 13.04.2022 registered under sections 120- B/153-A IPC and sections 17/18/18-B/20/22-B/38/39 UAPA by the National Investigation Agency, Delhi, which narrated that the Central Government had received credible information that the office bearers and members of the Popular Front of India (‘PFI’) were conspiring and raising funds, both internationally and domestically, for engaging and supporting terrorist activities across States in India.

8. Thereafter, vidé Gazette Notification dated 27.09.2022 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, PFI and its associates or affiliates or front organisations were declared as an “unlawful association” in terms of the UAPA. The aforesaid notification was further confirmed by order dated 21.03.2023 passed under section 4(3) of the UAPA by the learned UAPA Tribunal.

9. Investigation conducted by the ED in the case is stated to have revealed that the Social Democratic Party of India (‘SDPI’) established in 2009, was operating under the control of PFI; and that SDPI had functioned as a front for laundering proceeds of crime, as well as for furthering PFI’s political objectives; and that the functional linkage between the two organisations was inter-alia confirmed by SDPI’s National President, Moideen Kutty K @ MK Faizy, in his statement recorded under section 50 of the PMLA.

10. It is the case of ED that the petitioner herein is closely connected to both SDPI and PFI; and that he was engaged as a Physical Education trainer with PFI, which position is also stated to have been confirmed by the petitioner in his statement recorded under section 50 of the PMLA. It is alleged that the petitioner was actively involved in the ‘layering’ of proceeds of crime by projecting them as legitimate donations.

11. In the above backdrop, the petitioner has been named in the 7^th SPC and was arrested by ED on 20.03.2025 and has been lodged in judicial custody ever since.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

12. Mr. Pujari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has made the following principal arguments in support of the petitioner’s case:

12.1. That the respondent-agency registered the subject ECIR back in 2022 and the petitioner has come to be named for the first time only in the 7^th SPC and has been arraigned as accused No. 30;

12.2. That even though the allegations against the petitioner pertain to layering and concealment of ‘proceeds of crime’ through direct and conduit transactions into SDPI’s bank accounts, ED has failed to show how t