The court ruled that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution takes precedence over the twin conditions for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA.
The court emphasized that the constitutional guarantees must mitigate the rigors of the statutory conditions, especially when liberty is the core value at stake.
Criticism of ED's Arguments
The court heavily criticized the Enforcement Directorate for its arguments against bail, stating that they "fly in the face" of constitutional mandates and bail principles.
Article 21 - No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 or PMLA covers bail. Clause (1) of Section 45 is stringent — the accused would get bail only if the court was satisfied there were reasonable grounds for believing they were not guilty
The court argued that the ED had no right to contest the incarceration of detainees solely based on Section 45 of the PMLA and the "bogey of economic offense."
Fundamental Right to Liberty
The court reiterated the accused's fundamental right to liberty, stating that the prosecution has no right to plead for continued detention.
The court emphasized that Article 21 applies irrespective of the nature of the crime.
Reprimand for Continuous Opposition to Bail
The Special Judge reprimanded the ED for its persistent opposition to bail pleas filed by the accused.
The court highlighted that the primary issue was the significance of liberty, not the labored arguments presented by the ED.
COMMENTS