High Court Grants Bail in High Profile Money Laundering Case
A woman, not the principal accused, 17 months of incarceration, and no immediate prospect of trial conclusion.
Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Rakhi Goyal, an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The decision, delivered by Justice Sameer Jain, took into account the proviso of Section 45 of the PMLA which allows for bail considerations for women, minors, or infirm persons.
Rakhi Goyal, implicated in a high-profile money laundering case, has been in jail for over 17 months. The case involves allegations that Goyal, along with her husband Sudhir Kumar Goyal and others, developed illegal colonies, committing fraud amounting to hundreds of crores, with the proceeds of crime estimated at Rs. 2.26 crores. However, the court noted that Sudhir Kumar Goyal appears to be the principal accused in the case, with Rakhi Goyal being accused primarily due to her association with him.
The court's decision emphasized the principle that "bail is the rule and jail is an exception," as reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of "Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement." The court considered the prolonged detention of Rakhi Goyal and the improbability of an early conclusion to the trial due to the complex nature of the scheduled offences involved.
Justice Sameer Jain pointed out that the existence of scheduled offences is essential for proving the existence of proceeds of crime under Section 3 of the PMLA. Thus, the trial of the offences under PMLA cannot be concluded until the trials of the scheduled offences are completed, which could take a significant amount of time.
The Directorate of Enforcement (E.D.) opposed the bail application, highlighting the severity of the charges and the involvement of the accused in duping the public. However, they conceded that Rakhi Goyal, being a woman and having been incarcerated for 17 months, could be considered for bail under the proviso of Section 45.
The court granted bail to Rakhi Goyal on the condition that she furnish a personal bond and two sureties, appear before the trial court on scheduled dates, refrain from tampering with evidence, and abstain from any criminal activities.
This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that prolonged pre-trial detention does not undermine an individual's right to liberty, especially when the accused is not the principal offender. The judgment also reflects the court's adherence to legal provisions that provide for leniency towards women and other specified categories of accused.
The ruling has been met with varied reactions, with some legal experts viewing it as a balanced approach in line with constitutional values, while others express concern over its implications for the prosecution of complex financial crimes. As Rakhi Goyal prepares to rejoin her family, the case continues to be closely watched, given its potential ramifications for similar cases under the PMLA.
Rakhi Goyal v. Directorate of Enforcement, (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2762967
