Bail is rule and jail is exception even in PMLA cases: Supreme Court
In a verdict with vast consequences the general principle of law that ‘bail is rule and jail is exception’ holds good even in money laundering cases under the Protection of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provided that other conditions are fulfilled the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday while enlarging on bail one Prem Prakash who is an accused in a money laundering case which has some connections with the Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren.
In a constitution bench by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, the liberty of individual is always the rule and deprivation of the same by procedure established by law is an exception.
This principle will be overridden by the remaining stringent conditions for bail under PMLA, the Court made it clear.
Bail is rule and jail is exception even in PMLA cases: Supreme CourtFollowing the judgement in Manish Sisodia, this is what we have said that even under PMLA bail is the rule and jail is the exception All that section 45 lays down is conditions for bail Liberty of the individual is always the rule and deprivation by procedure established by law is the exception Twin test does not take away this principle reads the Bench.
With respect to the subject of judicial precedent, Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan.
In this case, Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan.
More to the point, the Court also concluded that any confession made by the PMLA accused to the investigating office will not be used to be given as evidence and this bar to such confession under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act will apply.
As the Bench aptly pointed out, for the statement of the appellant if to be considered as incriminating against the maker, then Section 25 of the Evidence Act totally hits the statement since the appellant was giving the said statement while in judicial custody in relation to another proceeding instigated by the same Investigating Agency; and it would be egregious injustice if the appellant was taken from judicial custody just to record his statement but the statement is admissible against
Section 25 Evidence Act will also have to be decided case by case in the context of PMLA, it said.
For that reason, in the instant case, the Court said that trial is still pending, and a number of witnesses are still to be produced before the Court.
The Court also found that prima facie the appellant has not committed the said offences and there are risks that he is likely to interfere with evidence. It said that it was a fit case for bail hence enlightened the applicant of the reasons why she had been arrested.
The Court therefore exercised its discretion and released Prakash on bail but on the following conditions namely, he will provide a bail bond of ₹ 5,00,000/- with two sureties of similar amount and such other conditions as may be considered appropriate by the trial court.
The senior Advocates Ranjit Kumar and Siddharth Agarwal along with the Advocates Indrajit Sinha, Sneh Singhand Anusuya Sadhu Sinha Sowjhanya Shankar, Harsh Yadav Siddharth Naidu of KSN & Co were for Prakash.
SV Raju for the Additional Solicitor General appeared for ED as Advocates Zoheb Hossain, Annam Venkatesh, Kanu Agrawal, Mrigank Pathak, Aakrit Mishra, Arvind Kumar Sharma
