Read Time: 05 minutes

The Allahabad High Court recently observed Money Laundering being an offence is economic threat to national interest and it is committed by the white-collar offenders who are deeply rooted in society and cannot be traced out easily.

The bench of Justice Krishan Pahal observed thus while dismissing the anticipatory bail plea filed by a man booked for the charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. 

Court said, "These kind of offences are committed with proper conspiracy, deliberate design with the motive of personal gain regardless of the consequences to the society and economy of Country. Hence, for money-launderers jail is the rule and bail is an exception."

An anticipatory bail was moved by one Anirudh Kamal Shukla who has been booked under Section 3/4 of PMLA, 2002. It was alleged that Shukla along with his brother entered into a criminal conspiracy with one R.K. Mishra, Senior Branch Manager Credit and Vinny Sodhi @ Vikram Dixit, for sanction of an overdraft limit of Rs.2.50 lakhs for business purposes against the mortgaged of property of one Ram Nath Sharma by submitted fake documents. 

Later on, it was revealed in the investigation that Rs.25,000 were transferred to the current account of Shukla on November 6, 2006, which was utilized in business. Shukla had admitted to this fact. 

Delivering the verdict, Court noted that Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002 specially provides two conditions that are mandatory in nature and must be complied with before granting bail to the accused of an offence.

First, that the prosecutor must be given an opportunity to oppose the application for bail; and second that the court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

Accordingly, analyzing the facts of the instant case and taking into account the material put on record, Court was of the prima facie view that it could not be held that Shukla was not guilty of the alleged offences or that he was not likely to commit any such offence while on bail.

Therefore, Court dismissed Shukla's application for pre-arrest bail stressing that the observations made were exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.

Case Title: Anirudh Kamal Shukla v. Union Of India Thru. Assistant Dir. Directorate Of Enforcement Lko