Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439

Bail –  Nowhere is it the law that an accused, yet to be tried, is to be kept in custody only on a hunch or a presumption that he will prejudice or impede trial; or to send any message to the society - If anything, the only message that goes-out to the society by keeping an accused in prison before finding him guilty, is that our system works only on impressions and conjectures and can keep an accused in custody even on presumption of guilt - While in certain cases such message may even quench the thirst for revenge of the lay society against a person they believe to be guilty, such action would certainly not leave our criminal justice system awash in glory -  An investigating agency must come to court with the confidence that they have arrested an accused, based on credible material, and have filed a complaint or a charge-sheet with the certainty that they will be able to bring home guilt, by satisfying a court beyond reasonable doubt - But when an investigating agency suggests that an accused be detained in custody as an undertrial for a prolonged period, even after the complaint or charge-sheet has been filed, it appears that the investigating agency is not convinced of its case and so it fears that the accused may ‘get-off’ by discharge or acquittal; and that therefore the only way to `punish’ the accused is to let him remain in custody as an undertrial - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Sections #2020 SCeJ 1241 (Del.)  



 SC e@ Journal @ Rs. 1000/- (2020)

Call 9463598502






Bail –  All alleged offending acts and omissions, with which the applicant is charged, arise from financial transactions, done in the course of commercial dealings, through banking channels - Almost 05 months passed between recording of the ECIR - Enforcement Case Information Report (24.07.2019) and the applicant's arrest by the ED (12.12.2019) in the present case - Substantial time had therefore elapsed before the ED considered it necessary to arrest the applicant in the ECIR -  There is no allegation that during this phase, the applicant either tampered with evidence or influenced any witnesses or destroyed any records - The allegedly offending transactions cannot be undone, reversed, modified or altered in any manner since they are recorded and reflected in several records, including those of complainant in the FIR viz. regulatory bodies such as the RBI, Securities & Exchange Board of India, Registrar of Companies and the banks and financial institutions that processed these transactions - Records both physical and electronic, including equipment and hardware, have already been seized by the ED and are in its custody and control. 

Write a comment

Comments: 0

Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.