Professional Update
(Criminal Case laws)
Bail Appeal no. 2761/2024 (Delhi High Court)
Amandeep Singh Dhall
vs
Directorate of Enforcement.
Ratio.
The Article 21 enshrined in the constitution cannot be acting as an embargo to the statutory provision of section 45 of the PMLA. The Incarceration as a pre-trail detention is not permissible.
Facts.
The appellant has filed a bail application under section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS 2023) read with section 45 of the PMLA, 2022. The appellant is a highly educated individual doing the family business of brindco sales pvt. Ltd. The appellant has been arrested by the procesution after alleging the conspiracy in the delhi excise policy, 2021 after recording of the statements u/s 50 of the PMLA and the ditigal records u/s 17 recovered from the accused mobile phone of having excise policy in May 2021, whereas the excise polices were introduced in July 2021.
Issue.
Whether the accused is entitled to bail u/s 45 of the PMLA.
Findings.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that right of the personal liberty under article 21 is sacrosanct.
There is no case against the appellant except the self serving statements of the co-accused.
Further, no recoveries were made from the Applicant; there were no contemporaneous statements recorded involving the Applicant; there is no CCTV footage or audio or any form of record demonstrating the Applicant‟s involvement and no cash was recovered from the Applicant or his father.
It is further submitted that the Trial in the case is at the stage of scrutiny of documents which is currently ongoing and the trial is bound to take a long time.
It is submitted on behalf of the Applicant that there is no necessity for his continued custody as he has been in custody for nearly seventeen months while the investigation has been pending for 2 years, the 7th and 8th SPC have been filed on 17.05.2024 and 28.06.2024, respectively and the record consists of over 215 witnesses and over 500 documents running into tens of thousands of pages, therefore, there is no likelihood of the trial commencing in the near future. It is submitted that prolonged and meaningless incarceration is an unjustified and intolerable violation of Fundamental Right to Life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Considering the above situation, the Applicant is admitted to bail.
(Disclaimer: The information provided by the author in the article is for general informational purposes only. All information provided is in the good faith, however we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of any information in the article.)
CA Manoj Garg
9811275735