Allahabad High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in High-Profile Money Laundering Case

Procedural Irregularities in Summons Service Lead to Bail Decision; Applicant Undertakes Cooperation with Enforcement Directorate

In a significant ruling on September 17, 2025, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, granted anticipatory bail to Rajeev Nayan Mishra in a case involving alleged money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The decision, delivered by Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, hinges on procedural irregularities in the service of summons by the Enforcement Directorate and Mishra's commitment to cooperate with ongoing investigations.

Mishra, implicated in a case stemming from a police recruitment examination scandal, faced charges under Sections 3/4 of the PMLA. The Directorate of Enforcement lodged an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) following Mishra's alleged involvement in the scheduled offence, supported by custodial statements from other accused persons.

The Court's judgment noted significant procedural lapses in the service of summons. The Enforcement Directorate had purportedly issued summons during Mishra's time in judicial custody, which were not appropriately routed through jail authorities. Additionally, subsequent attempts to serve summons at his residence were marred by discrepancies, including an absence of photographic evidence of summons affixation and lack of witness signatures, raising doubts about the legitimacy of the service process.

Despite opposition from the Directorate's counsel, who argued Mishra's non-cooperation, the Court observed that Mishra had previously participated in attachment proceedings and provided undertakings to cooperate with future investigations. Justice Vidyarthi highlighted that Mishra had spent over seven months in custody related to the scheduled offence, and noted his lack of access to electronic communications due to the seizure of his mobile phone.

The Court's decision to grant anticipatory bail is accompanied by stringent conditions to ensure Mishra's availability for interrogation and prevent any interference with evidence or witnesses. Within a week, Mishra is required to furnish his current address, phone number, and email ID to the Directorate. He is also prohibited from leaving India without prior court permission and from exerting any undue influence on prosecution witnesses.

This landmark judgment underscores the importance of adhering to procedural norms in legal processes and affirms the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual rights amidst complex legal proceedings.

Bottom Line:

Anticipatory bail granted to applicant under Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, despite allegations of non-cooperation with investigation, considering the procedural irregularities in service of summons by the Enforcement Directorate and applicant's undertaking to cooperate with the investigation.

Statutory provision(s): 

• - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 438
• - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Sections 3/4

Rajeev Nayan Mishra @ Rajeev Nayan v. Directorate of Enforcement Govt. of India, (Allahabad)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2796444