Order Taking Cognizance Must Reflect Application Of Mind; Section 197 CrPC Sanction Mandatory For Prosecuting Public Servants: Karnataka High Court Plaint Cannot Be Rejected Partially Against Specific Defendants Or Properties; Limitation Is A Triable Issue: Telangana High Court Employee Having National Trade Certificate & Prior Experience To Be Treated As 'Highly Skilled' For Compensation: Orissa High Court Insurance Company Entitled To Subpoena Investigating Officer For Vehicle Records When Insured Is Untraceable: Madras High Court Seller's Fraudulent Conduct & Non-Disclosure Of Mortgage Justify Refund Of Advance Sale Consideration: Kerala High Court Complaint Under Section 138 NI Act Filed By Partner On Behalf Of Firm Maintainable Even Without Specific Authorization Letter: Gujarat High Court Extension Of Remand Beyond 180 Days Under NDPS Act Requires Public Prosecutor's Independent Report, Not Just IO's Request: Andhra Pradesh High Court Orissa Grama Panchayats Act | No Bar On Rescheduling No-Confidence Motion Meeting Before Its Commencement: High Court Non-Preparation Of ‘Nil’ Seizure List After Searching Raiding Officer Not Fatal To NDPS Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Registration Of Trademark Confers Exclusive Right To Sue For Infringement Irrespective Of Whether Mark Is In Use: Delhi High Court Presence Of Magistrate Not Mandatory For Recording Dying Declaration; Conviction Can Be Based On DD Recorded By Police: Bombay High Court Routine Bank Transfers Between Spouses For Daily Needs Are Gratuitous Payments, Not Recoverable As Entrusted Funds: Kerala High Court Clerical Lapses Under Work Pressure Amount To Dereliction Of Duty, Not Crime: Madras High Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Deputy BDO Burden Of Proving Sale Deed Is Bona Fide Lies On Beneficiary If Executant Is Illiterate Or Vulnerable: Andhra Pradesh High Court Employee Cannot Take Advantage Of Own Delay; Employer Not Required To Preserve Disciplinary Records For Eternity: Bombay High Court Deadline To File Evidence Under Rule 45 Trade Marks Rules Is Directory, Registrar Can Extend Time Under Section 131: Bombay High Court Exclusion Of Interest In Insurance Policy Is Conditional; Insurer Must Plead & Prove Employer's Failure To Comply With Act To Avoid Liability: Kerala High Court Practicing Lawyer Entitled To Interim Maintenance From Husband If Income Is Insufficient To Maintain Standard Of Living: Orissa High Court Section 138 NI Act Offences Can Be Compounded At Any Stage Even After Dismissal Of Revision Or Appeal: Madras High Court Unsuccessful Party Seeking Post-Award Interim Relief Under Section 9 Faces 'Higher Threshold', Must Show Rare & Compelling Circumstances: Bombay High Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court's Grant of Bail in Money Laundering Case, Orders Fresh Consideration

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 12 May 12, 2023, Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, has set aside the grant of bail by the High Court of Telangana in a case involving offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PML Act, 2002). The apex court directed the High Court to reconsider the bail applications in light of the observations made.

The case pertains to an FIR registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal, which implicated several individuals and companies in offences punishable under various sections, including Sections 120-B, 420, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 7(c) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The FIR revealed alleged tampering with eTenders to secure favorable bids for certain projects of the Madhya Pradesh Water Corporation, amounting to a staggering Rs. 1769.00 crores.

The Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad, initiated a money laundering investigation, pursuant to the offences charged in the FIR. The respondent, Aditya Tripathi, one of the accused, had filed a bail application before the High Court. The High Court allowed the bail applications, stating that the investigation was completed and chargesheets had been filed.

However, the Directorate of Enforcement, the appellant, approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court had failed to consider the rigour of Section 45 of the PML Act, which pertains to the release on bail in money laundering cases. The appellant contended that the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate was still ongoing, and the seriousness of the scheduled offences under the PML Act had not been adequately considered.

The Supreme Court, after hearing arguments from both parties, held that the High Court had indeed erred in not properly considering the rigour of Section 45 of the PML Act and the nature of the allegations. The Court emphasized that the investigation for scheduled offences under the PML Act was distinct from the investigation for the predicated offences. Merely filing chargesheets for the predicated offences could not be a valid ground for granting bail in connection with the scheduled offences under the PML Act.

Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision to grant bail and ordered a fresh consideration of the bail applications. The Court instructed the respondent to surrender before the competent court or the concerned jail authority within one week from the date of the judgment. The matter was remitted back to the High Court for reevaluation in light of the Court's observations.

This judgment by the Supreme Court reaffirms the stringent provisions of the PML Act and highlights the importance of thorough investigations into money laundering offences. It serves as a reminder that the seriousness of such offences must be taken into account when considering bail applications, and investigations should continue independently of chargesheets filed for other related offences.

12 May 12, 2023

Directorate of Enforcement vs Aditya Tripathi                                          

Latest Legal News