P&H High Court Frees 73-Year-Old PMLA Convict on Bail, Adds Eco-Twist: Plant 20 Saplings

In a compassionate ruling blending mercy with environmental responsibility, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has suspended the five-year rigorous imprisonment sentence of 73-year-old Gurdeep Singh Manchanda, convicted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry granted bail pending appeal, noting his acquittal in the underlying predicate offence, substantial time already served in custody, advanced age, medical issues, and the likelihood of prolonged appeal proceedings.

Roots in a 2013 Drug Bust: The Case Unravels

The saga traces back to 2013, when an FIR (No. 45/2013) was registered at Fatehgarh Sahib Police Station under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, alongside IPC sections for cheating, forgery, and the Arms Act. This spawned ECIR/02/JLZO/2013 by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), alleging money laundering under Sections 3 and 4 of PMLA.

Manchanda was convicted on July 30, 2024, and sentenced to five years' RI plus a ₹30,000 fine (with five months' additional jail in default). However, he was acquitted in a related predicate FIR (No. 50/2013, Urban Estate Patiala) on February 13, 2019 ( State vs. Palwinder Singh @ Pinda ), and cleared in three other cases. His appeal was admitted in August 2024, but with a hearing slated for April 1, 2026, further incarceration seemed futile.

Defence Plea: Innocence, Age, and Acquittals vs. ED's Firm Stand

Senior Advocate Bipan Ghai, leading a team including Nikhil Ghai, Joban Singh Dhaliwal, Tushar Rawal, and Himanshu Kashyap, argued Manchanda's false implication. Key points: acquittal in the predicate trial, clean slate in other cases, 73 years of age with medical ailments, and over a year in custody. They invoked the Supreme Court's February 6, 2026, ruling in Arun Dubey vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (SLP(Crl.) No. 1877/2016) for suspension.

Opposing, Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain, with Meghna Malik, Shobit Phutela, and Shourya Mehra for ED, countered that Manchanda actively participated in the crime, warranting no leniency despite the predicate acquittal.

Balancing Scales: Why the Court Tilted Towards Release

The Bench meticulously reviewed the record, affirming the predicate acquittal. Crucially, a custody certificate confirmed 1 year, 4 months, and 27 days served. With the 2024 appeal unlikely to hear soon, the court held: "no purpose would be served by keeping applicant-appellant in custody." This echoes PMLA jurisprudence where prolonged detention without swift adjudication undermines justice, especially for elderly appellants with clean predicate slates.

The Arun Dubey precedent reinforced that undue custody pending appeal defeats fairness under Section 389 CrPC.

Key Observations

- "The applicant was cited as accused in the predicate offence... however, he was acquitted in the trial... vide judgment dated 13.02.2019."

- "The custody certificate... showing to have undergone actual custody period of 1 year 4 months 27 days."

- "The appeal... is not likely to be heard soon and no purpose would be served by keeping applicant-appellant in custody."

- "The applicant-appellant is directed to plant 20 saplings during ensuing monsoon season and maintain thereof for one year."

Green Bail and Global Travel Curbs: The Final Orders

The court suspended the remaining sentence, directing release on bail bonds before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, subject to fine deposit. Manchanda must not leave India without permission and prove sapling plantation—a novel condition promoting sustainability amid leniency.

This ruling signals courts' growing nuance in PMLA cases: predicate acquittals, age, custody quantum, and appeal delays can tip scales for suspension, potentially easing dockets clogged with long-pending matters while upholding accountability through tailored conditions.