New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday said that money laundering is not an ordinary offence, and any casual or cursory approach by the courts while considering the bail application of the offender and granting him bail by passing cryptic orders without considering the seriousness of the crime and without considering the rigours of Section 45, cannot be vindicated.
A bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Prasanna B Varale said the offence of money laundering is not an ordinary offence, and the offence of money laundering has been regarded as an aggravated form of crime world over and the offenders involved in the activity connected with the proceeds of crime are treated as a separate class from ordinary criminals. "Any casual or cursory approach by the Courts while considering the bail application of the offender involved in the offence of money laundering and granting him bail by passing cryptic orders without considering the seriousness of the crime and without considering the rigours of Section 45, cannot be vindicated," said the bench.
The twin conditions in Section 45 of PMLA prescribe that the prosecutor must be given an opportunity to oppose the bail plea and the court must satisfy itself that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the accused was not guilty of the offence and not liable to commit any offence on bail.
Justice Trivedi, who authored the judgment on behalf of the bench, said there remains no shadow of doubt that the consideration of the two conditions mentioned in Section 45 is mandatory and that while considering the bail application, the said rigours of Section 45 have to be reckoned by the court to uphold the objectives of the PMLA.
The apex court delivered its judgment on an appeal by the Enforcement Directorate challenging a Patna High Court order, which granted bail to an accused Kanhaiya Prasad, in a money laundering case. The bench set aside the order passed by the high court in May 2024 and remanded the matter back to the high court for fresh consideration.
The bench said the offence of money laundering is a very serious offence which is committed by an individual with a deliberate desire and the motive to enhance his gains, disregarding the interest of the nation and the society as a whole, and such offence by no stretch of imagination can be regarded as an offence of trivial nature. The bench said stringent provisions have been made in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to combat the menace of money laundering.
The apex court said the high court has utterly failed to consider the mandatory requirements of Section 45 and to record its satisfaction whether any reasonable ground existed for believing that the respondent was not guilty of the alleged offence and that he was not likely to commit any offence while on bail. “Merely because the prosecution complaint had been filed and the cognizance was taken by the court that itself would not be the ground or consideration to release the respondent on bail when the mandatory requirements as contemplated in Section 45 have not been complied with”, said the bench.
The bench said the high court order being in teeth of Section 45 of PMLA and also in the teeth of the settled legal position, therefore it is of the opinion that the impugned order deserves to be set aside, and the matter is required to be remanded to the high court for fresh consideration. The bench directed Prasad to surrender before the special court within one week from today.
