If you do not appear on summons, you will have to fulfill double condition of bail, important decision of Supreme Court

Ronit Kawale
Ronit Kawale - Senior Editor
5 Min Read

New Delhi: The Supreme Court made it clear in an important decision that if an accused in a money laundering case appears on the summons of the court, then he will not have to fulfill the double condition of bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). , The two legal questions before the Supreme Court were that if the special court issues summons to the accused under the PMLA Act, will he apply for bail? If so, will dual conditions for bail under Section 45 of PMLA apply? In fact, there is a provision under Section 45 of the PMLA Act that an accused in a money laundering case can be granted bail only if he fulfills the dual condition. to do. That is, firstly, it should be shown that the accused has not committed the crime and secondly, there should be no possibility of committing the crime during the period of bail. This condition is quite strict and that is why it is not easy to get bail after arrest in a PMLA case.

WhatsApp Group Join Now
Telegram Group Join Now

'Filing of bail bond means that attendance is ensured'

The Supreme Court bench led by Justice AS Oka has said in its important decision that if there is an accused in the PMLA case and the special court has issued summons to him. If he appears in the special court, when he is produced, it will not be considered that he is in custody. In such a situation, it is not necessary for the accused to fulfill the double condition for bail. Rather, the special court can ask them to pay bail bond.

Under Section 88 of CrPC, when the court issues summons to the accused in a case, after the appearance of the accused, the court makes him execute a bail bond to ensure that the accused continues to appear in the court in future. This happens in those cases in which the accused has not been arrested. The Supreme Court said that in such a case, it is not mandatory to implement the strict provision of double bail condition under Section 45 of the PMLA Act while accepting the bail bond.

Kejriwal's petition against ED summons will be heard on July 11.

What was the matter

The case is of Tarsem vs ED. ED based in Jalandhar zone of Punjab had registered a case of money laundering against the accused. The court had issued summons against the accused. After the summons, he filled the bail bond before the court and said that the double condition under Section 45 of the PMLA Act does not apply to him. ED said that when the matter is of PMLA then double condition under Section 45 will apply. The accused approached the High Court for anticipatory bail but after not getting relief from there, filed an application in the Supreme Court.

So has the Supreme Court tightened the noose on the power of ED? Understand the meaning of this decision.

This decision will also set an example

PMLA law is very strict and the accused in this case does not get bail easily. However, in many past decisions the Supreme Court has been strict on ED. Recently, on March 20, 2024, the Supreme Court had said that if there is a delay in the hearing of a money laundering case, then there is no bar on granting bail. On October 4, 2023, the Supreme Court had said that despite ED's summons, non-cooperation cannot be a ground for arrest. The Supreme Court had said that at the time of arrest of the accused, the ED will have to explain the grounds of arrest in writing. Now the Supreme Court has given an important decision in the matter of double condition of bail. These decisions will prove to be an example in matters related to this in the coming days and the situation will become more clear.

PressNews24 provides latest news, bollywood news, breaking news hollywood, top tech news, business standard news, indian economy news, world economy news, travel news, mumbai news, latest news mumbai loksabha election 2024, video viral news, delhi news, Only at PressNews24.in

Leave a comment