Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Absence of Key Managerial Role and Direct Evidence Leads to Bail in Money Laundering Case – Delhi HC Grants Bail to Sanjay Kansal in ED Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court today granted bail to Sanjay Kansal, who was arrested in connection with a money laundering case involving fictitious firms and bogus transactions linked to a large-scale bank fraud. The court’s decision pivoted on the absence of direct evidence tying Kansal to the knowledge or intent of laundering money, given his non-managerial role in the accused company, M/s Shree Bankey Bihari Exports Ltd. (SBBEL).

Sanjay Kansal was implicated as part of an Enforcement Directorate (ED) investigation into money laundering through fictitious transactions and paper firms purportedly used to siphon off funds. Kansal, the nephew of a primary accused, was portrayed by the ED as having facilitated these sham transactions through firms allegedly under his control.

Arguing for bail, Kansal’s legal team highlighted the lack of direct involvement or knowledge of the laundering process, pointing out his peripheral role in the company and the manipulated nature of evidence against him. They stressed the disparity in the treatment of similarly placed co-accused, none of whom were arrested, raising concerns about parity and fairness in legal proceedings.

Justice Amit Sharma, in his judgment, underscored the fundamental principles of bail assessment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), stressing the importance of considering the accused’s role and the nature of evidence. The court noted the “broad probabilities” suggesting that Kansal might not have had the requisite ‘mens rea’ (criminal intent) necessary for the offence of money laundering.

The judgment meticulously detailed the submissions and countered the allegations placed by the ED. It pointed out the procedural inconsistencies and the reliance on statements under Section 50 of the PMLA, which were deemed insufficient to deny bail. The court observed that Kansal was merely following instructions from the key managerial personnel and was not privy to the overarching conspiracy or financial dealings of the company that would suggest his involvement in the crime.

Granting bail, the court set forth several conditions, including a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of the same amount. Kansal is restricted from leaving the country without court permission and must maintain operational communication lines with the investigating officers.

This decision is pivotal, especially in highlighting the judiciary’s role in balancing the scales of justice by considering the individual roles and the evidence against accused persons in complex money laundering cases. It reaffirms the principles of justice where bail is not denied merely on the basis of assumptions, and each case is assessed on its own merits, safeguarding the rights of the accused against unwarranted detention.

Date of Decision: May 9, 2024

Sanjay Kansal vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement

Similar News