Supreme Court Holds That Prolonged Pre-Trial Incarceration in PMLA Cases Violates Article 21 and Statutory Bail Embargo Cannot Result in Indefinite Detention When Trial Is Not Likely to Commence

Case Name: Arvind Dham v. Directorate of Enforcement
Citation: 2026 INSC 12
Date of Judgment/Order: 06 January 2026
Bench: Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Alok Aradhe

Held: The Supreme Court held that continued pre-trial incarceration of an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, for an extended period without commencement or reasonable progress of trial violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21, and that statutory bail restrictions under Section 45 PMLA cannot be interpreted to justify indefinite detention when the maximum sentence is limited and the evidence is predominantly documentary.

Summary: The appeal arose from rejection of the appellant’s regular bail application by the Delhi High Court in a money-laundering case arising out of alleged bank fraud involving the Amtek Group. The appellant, a former promoter and non-executive chairman, had been in custody for over sixteen months, while investigation qua him stood concluded, cognizance had not yet been taken, and the case involved more than two hundred witnesses and voluminous documentary evidence. The Supreme Court examined the scope of bail under Section 45 of the PMLA in light of Article 21 jurisprudence, prior decisions on prolonged incarceration, and the factual matrix showing that delay in trial was largely attributable to the prosecuting agency itself. The Court rejected allegations of witness tampering and dissipation of proceeds of crime at the bail stage, noting absence of credible material and the documentary nature of evidence already in custody of the prosecution.

Decision: The appeal was allowed, the impugned order of the Delhi High Court dated 19.08.2025 was set aside, the appellant was directed to be released on regular bail during pendency of trial on such terms and conditions as fixed by the Trial Court, including surrender of passport and compliance with investigation requirements, and all pending applications were disposed of.