Court Emphasizes Constitutional Safeguards Over Procedural Rigidity in PMLA Cases; Bail Granted Due to Prolonged Detention and Lack of Direct Evidence
In a significant legal development, the Chhattisgarh High Court has granted bail to Chaitanya Baghel, accused in a major money laundering case involving the Chhattisgarh liquor syndicate scam. The case, which centers around an alleged multi-crore scam in the state's excise administration, has seen multiple arrests and a protracted legal battle. The court's decision, rendered by Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, underscores the importance of constitutional safeguards and the proportionality of detention in cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) had arrested Baghel, accusing him of being involved in laundering proceeds from the scam, which allegedly caused a loss of approximately Rs. 2161 crore to the state exchequer. However, the court noted that Baghel was not directly involved in any administrative capacity within the excise department or related bodies, and there was no fresh incriminating evidence against him.
Justice Verma highlighted that while the PMLA imposes stringent conditions for bail, these cannot override constitutional guarantees of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court observed that the twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA, though mandatory, do not necessitate the denial of bail in the absence of direct evidence linking Baghel to the alleged laundering activities.
The court was critical of the ED's approach, noting the absence of a summons under Section 50 of the PMLA prior to Baghel's arrest, which deprived him of the opportunity to respond to the allegations. This procedural lapse, while not invalidating the arrest, was considered significant in assessing the fairness and necessity of detention.
Moreover, the court emphasized the principle of parity, noting that several co-accused with more significant roles in the conspiracy had already been granted bail. The court found no justifiable reason to treat Baghel differently, given the lack of distinguishing features in his alleged involvement.
In granting bail, the court imposed stringent conditions to ensure Baghel's presence during the trial and prevent any potential misuse of liberty. These include the surrender of his passport and an undertaking to cooperate with trial proceedings. The court also opened the possibility for bail cancellation if Baghel breaches any conditions.
This decision reflects a broader judicial trend of balancing statutory stringency with constitutional proportionality, particularly in cases where prolonged detention occurs without timely trial proceedings. The judgment reinforces the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual freedoms against undue procedural constraints.
Bottom Line:
Bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) - Applicant accused of involvement in laundering proceeds of crime related to a liquor syndicate scam - Court emphasized constitutional safeguards, proportionality, and necessity of detention over procedural rigidity in special statutes like PMLA - Bail granted considering prolonged pre-trial detention, parity with co-accused, lack of fresh incriminating evidence, and absence of direct involvement.
Statutory provision(s):
- Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Sections 19, 45, 50
- Indian Penal Code, Sections 420, 467, 471, 120B
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 7, 12
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 483 (pari materia to Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973)
Chaitanya Baghel v. Directorate Of Enforcement, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2833173
