Font size:
Print
Bail Under PMLA For Women
Context:
The Supreme Court heard the case of Shashi Bala, a government school teacher accused of helping the Shine City Group in a money laundering scam. After considering her circumstances and the statutory exception for women, the court granted her bail.
PMLA’s Stringent Bail Standards
Bail is a key principle of justice, based on the idea that “bail is a right, jail is an exception.” The Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, sets strict conditions for bail under Section 45(1). However, it includes exceptions for vulnerable groups like women to address specific social and legal challenges.
Section 45(1) Conditions
- Twin Bail Requirements:
- The accused must demonstrate no prima facie case of guilt.
- The court must be convinced they are unlikely to reoffend.
- Exception Clause:
- Provision extends discretion for bail to:
- Individuals below 16 years.
- Women.
- Sick or infirm individuals.
- Provision extends discretion for bail to:
Key Judicial Precedents on Women’s Exception
Supreme Court Decisions
- Shashi Bala Case (2025):
- ED’s Allegation: Aided Shine City promoter Rasheed Naseem in laundering ₹36 lakh.
- Observation: Criticised ED’s argument against statutory exceptions for women.
- Verdict: Granted bail under the statutory exception.
- K. Kavitha Case:
- SC granted bail, emphasising sensitivity towards vulnerable women.
- Rejected mandatory application of the exception for “well-placed” women.
High Court Rulings
- Delhi HC (2023): Preeti Chandra v. ED
- Exception applies universally to all women.
- Rejected subclassification based on education or status.
- Allahabad HC (2024): Shashi Bala Case
- Denied bail due to alleged association with absconding Naseem and large-scale fraud.
Supreme Court’s Criticism of ED
- SC’s Stand:
- ED’s position against the exception was deemed “contrary to law.”
- Statutory exceptions for women must apply uniformly without subclassifications.
- Shashi Bala’s Case:
- Bail granted based on prolonged custody (since November 2023) and the statutory exception.
Implications for Shine City Scam
- Scale of Fraud: ₹800–1000 crore involving over 554 FIRs.
- ED Allegations: Bala accused of laundering ₹36 lakh and aiding in concealing proceeds of crime.
Judicial Interpretation of Women’s Exception
- Evolving Trends
- Earlier Approach: Relaxed interpretation favouring bail for women without applying twin conditions.
- Current Approach: Judicial discretion prioritises case-specific circumstances.
- Key Case Law
- Gautam Kundu v. ED: Affirmed legislative intent behind Section 45(1) exceptions.
- Shivani Rajiv Saxena v. ED: Proviso excludes women from twin conditions but requires special circumstances for application.
- Preeti Chandra v. ED: SC upheld the High Court’s broad application of the women’s exception.
Conclusion
- Balancing Rights and Discretion:
- Courts recognise women’s vulnerabilities while ensuring fairness.
- Subclassification based on status and risk is sometimes considered but remains contentious.
- SC’s Stand: Reinforces uniform application of Section 45(1) exceptions, preventing misuse while ensuring equity in exceptional cases.
