NEW DELHI, May 16: The Supreme Court ruled that once a special court acknowledges a complaint of money laundering, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is prohibited from arresting an accused under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
In a bench led by Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, it was asserted that if an accused appears before a court in response to a summons, the agency must seek the court’s approval to obtain custody of the individual. The bench emphasized that complying with a court summons does not constitute being in custody.
Furthermore, the bench clarified that an accused who appears in court due to a summons is not obligated to apply for bail. Consequently, the stringent twin conditions outlined in Section 45 of the PMLA, which pertain to bail applications in money laundering cases, do not apply in such circumstances.
These twin conditions dictate that in money laundering cases, if an accused seeks bail, the court must first allow the public prosecutor to present their case. Only if the court is convinced that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit a similar offence upon release can bail be granted.
The Supreme Court’s ruling addressed the query of whether an accused in a money laundering case must meet the rigorous twin test for bail even when the special court acknowledges the offence.
