Protection in predicate offence doesn't automatically extend to PMLA case: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled that protection granted in a predicate offence FIR does not automatically extend to separate proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This decision was made while denying anticipatory bail to a businessman facing PMLA charges. The court found that the petitioner's apprehension of arrest from the predicate offence FIR cannot be used to justify pre-arrest protection in the PMLA case.
Economic offences, like those under PMLA, are unique and require a serious approach when considering bail. The Supreme Court has consistently stressed the need for a serious evaluation of bail in economic offence cases. The petitioner, Ram Singh of Babaji Finance Group, was accused of money laundering and was seeking anticipatory bail.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had evidence linking him to the alleged proceeds of crime, totaling approximately ₹26.18 crore. The court denied bail, stating that the material placed on record, including the petitioner's lack of cooperation and failure to appear before the ED, did not satisfy the conditions required under the PMLA.
Written by urgent.news from The Hindu's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
This story
This is one outlet's version. Read the fullest account.
- From the bench to sacked: How Justice Joseph Mutava’s career ended on a low peopledaily.digital
