New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has held that protection granted in a predicate offence FIR does not mean it extends to distinct and independent proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act .
The high court made the observation while denying anticipatory bail to a businessman facing prosecution in a PMLA case. It refused to accept the petitioner’s contention that his apprehension of arrest must be considered in the backdrop of the protection granted to him by the Supreme Court in the predicate offence FIR. The ED counsel opposed the plea, saying the accused should have first approached the sessions court for the relief. The ED counsel submitted that this case involves serious allegations of money laundering and requires a detailed investigation into the trail of the alleged proceeds of crime. It was contended that the petitioner’s personal presence was necessary for effective collection of evidence, confrontation with documentary and digital material and eliciting information within his exclusive knowledge.
Economic offences constitute a distinct class of offences and, therefore, call for a different approach while considering a prayer for bail, the court said.
“The Supreme Court has consistently emphasised the need to adopt a serious approach while considering bail in matters involving economic offences,” it said. He further said the accused has failed to join the investigation and was not cooperating despite issuance of repeated summonses. Grant of anticipatory bail at this stage would seriously impede the investigation, the counsel said.
