Justice Neena Bansal Krishna approved the bail, observing that the trial is expected to take a considerable amount of time to complete and noting that the allegations against Sukanya are tied to her father, who is a primary accused in the case.
NEW DELHI: On Tuesday(10th Sept), the Delhi High Court granted bail to Sukanya Mondal, daughter of Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Anubrata Mondal, in a money laundering case related to cattle smuggling case.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna approved the bail, observing that the trial is expected to take a considerable amount of time to complete and noting that the allegations against Sukanya are tied to her father, who is a primary accused in the case.
The Court remarked, “Similar to the case of Saumya Chaurasia, while the applicant is an educated woman with her own business and commercial interests, it must be acknowledged that the allegations against her are primarily linked to her father. It is alleged that she has used her commercial activities to launder money received as a bribe by her father.”
The Court noted that Anubrata Mondal, the father of the applicant, was granted bail primarily because he had been in custody since August 11, 2022, and the case was still at the preliminary stage under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C.
The chargesheet was extensive and included documents in Bengali that required translation, which contributed to the delay in proceedings. Consequently, Anubrata Mondal was granted bail due to the voluminous nature of the documents and the anticipated lengthy duration of the trial.
Additionally, the Court stated that Sukanya is eligible for bail under the provision benefiting women in Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The case emerged after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) uncovered an illegal cattle smuggling operation transporting cattle from West Bengal to Bangladesh.
The CBI alleged that BSF Commandant Satish Kumar and West Bengal Police Constable Sehgal Hossain were accepting illegal bribes on behalf of Anubrata Mondal.
Following this, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) filed a case, claiming that the illicit proceeds were laundered through the companies owned by Anubrata Mondal and Sukanya Mondal.
Sukanya Mondal was arrested and placed in judicial custody on April 26, 2023.
Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa argued that the ED’s selective approach in arresting individuals was discriminatory.
It was also argued that the proviso to Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provides special provisions for women and those who are ill, allowing for relaxation of the usual bail conditions under Section 45.
Under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), bail can only be granted if the public prosecutor has had the opportunity to oppose the application and the Court is convinced that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and will not commit further offenses while on bail. However, the proviso to Section 45 provides exceptions for women, individuals with serious health conditions, and those under 16 years of age.
Sukanya Mondal claimed to suffer from gynecological and thyroid issues, for which she has been receiving treatment at Apollo Hospital in Chennai and has been advised to undergo surgery.
Mondal argued that as a 31-year-old single woman with a clean record and strong community ties, there is no risk of her fleeing from the trial. She also contended that her continued detention was unnecessary since the investigation was complete and the chargesheet had been filed, and that further incarceration would amount to a pre-trial conviction.
She alleged that the ED’s accusations were based on false and fabricated information and sought to be treated equally with other accused individuals, many of whom had not been arrested.
In response, the ED stated that Rs 12 crore in illicit funds had been laundered through bank accounts linked to Anubrata Mondal, Sukanya Mondal, and their associated firms. The ED argued that although Mondal presented herself as a primary school teacher, investigations showed she was actively involved in managing the family business finances.
They also disputed the seriousness of her medical condition, asserting that the documents she provided did not substantiate an urgent need for intervention, and her claim of needing surgery lacked supporting evidence.
The Court, taking these arguments into account, referred to a recent Supreme Court ruling in the Manish Sisodia case, affirming that the right to liberty is fundamental, even under stringent laws. It noted that the proviso to Section 45(1) of PMLA entitles women to special consideration when their bail applications are reviewed. The Court also cited the Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader K Kavitha in the Delhi excise policy case as relevant precedent.
In light of these considerations, the Court granted Mondal’s bail application.
“The Applicant is granted regular bail upon providing a personal bond of Rs 10,00,000 and one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial court,”
the High Court ordered.
Case Title: Sukanya Mondal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement
