In a significant ruling on Wednesday, the Supreme Court upheld the principle that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception” even in cases involving money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This decision came as the Court granted bail to Prem Prakash, an alleged associate of Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren, overturning a previous High Court judgment that had denied bail.
The Supreme Court’s ruling aligned with its earlier decision in the case of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia, who was granted bail in connection with the Delhi liquor policy scandal. Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, who presided over the case, emphasized that the principle of bail being the default option and incarceration the exception should apply across all legal contexts, including money laundering cases.
The Court also addressed the admissibility of confessions made by accused individuals under the PMLA. It ruled that such confessions would not generally be acceptable as evidence, referencing Section 25 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (formerly the Indian Evidence Act). The bench argued that allowing confessions made while in custody for another Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) to be used as evidence would undermine justice and fairness.
In its decision, the Supreme Court noted that Prem Prakash had already been imprisoned for an extended period and that delays in the trial process, attributed to the large number of witnesses involved, justified the grant of bail. The Court concluded that Prakash was not prima facie guilty of the charges and posed no risk of tampering with evidence. Consequently, bail was granted on the condition that Prakash provide a bail bond of Rs 5 lakh.
This ruling underscores the Court’s commitment to upholding individual liberties while ensuring that procedural fairness is maintained, even in complex financial crime cases under the PMLA.
