The Supreme Court has issued a stern rebuke to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its stance on applying stringent bail conditions to women in money laundering cases, despite clear legal exceptions outlined in the law. The bench, consisting of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih, highlighted this issue while granting bail to Shashi Bala, a government school teacher entangled in a money laundering scam linked to the Shine City Group of Companies.
During the proceedings, the Supreme Court criticized the ED’s interpretation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, particularly its argument that strict bail conditions should not exempt women. “We will not tolerate conduct… to make submissions contrary to statute,” remarked the bench, expressing frustration over the apparent disregard for statutory provisions that explicitly provide bail exceptions for women.
The legal contention at the center of this case involves Section 45 of the PMLA, which imposes rigorous conditions for bail in money laundering cases, such as requiring the accused to demonstrate no prima facie case against them. However, a crucial proviso to Section 45(1) explicitly states that individuals who are under sixteen, women, or are sick or infirm may be released on bail at the discretion of the Special Court.
The court’s decision to grant bail to Bala, who has been in custody since November 2023, was influenced by the lengthy anticipated duration of her trial and the statutory bail provisions for women. The justices also questioned the competency of legal representation for the Union of India, critiquing them for not being aware of “basic provisions of law.”
The Shine City Group, based in Lucknow, is accused of duping the public out of Rs 800-1000 crore through fraudulent investment schemes. Over 554 FIRs have been registered against the group and its promoter, Rasheed Naseem, who remains absconding. According to the ED, Bala was a significant associate in these schemes, allegedly playing a role in laundering the proceeds and receiving over Rs 36 lakh from the fraudulent activities.
