DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT vs SURENDER KUMAR BANSAL

Judgment text excerpt

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 07th April, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 5964/2023 & CRL.M.A. 22377/2023 DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, SPl. Counsel for ED with Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Panel Counsel for ED. versus SURENDER KUMAR BANSAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Adit Subramanium Pujari with Mr. Bhavesh Seth, Ms. Prerna Mukherjee and Mr. Vaibhav Rawat, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The cancellation of bail is being sought as there is nothing to indicate that Section 3 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) was not attracted. 2. The order in question is dated 31.03.2023, whereby the learned Trial Court has granted bail to the respondent herein while observing as under in para 19:- “19. From the above discussion, it appears that the ingredients of the offence of money laundering as defined in the original definition U/s 3 of the PMLA, 20022 are not made out in this case. If the ingredients of offence as defined in the original act and as applicable to the case are not made out, then the question of applicability of twin conditions of Section 45, PMLA shall not arise. The twin conditions of section 45 PMLA shall not apply to facts of present case.” Signature Not Verified Signed By:SONIA CRL.M.C. 5964/2023 1 THAPLIYAL Signing Date:08.04.2026 17:58:16 3. Learned Special Counsel for the petitioner agitates that the abovesaid finding is not sustainable as there are clear-cut ingredients to make out the abovesaid offence. 4. The abovesaid impugned order is though exhaustive which takes into consideration facts and the legal aspects of the issue involved, fact remains that the abovesaid is only a prima facie and tentative observation of the learned Trial Court and c