The Delhi High Court on Tuesday granted bail to British national Christian Michel in the money laundering case connected to the AgustaWestland chopper scam..Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma passed the order after taking into account his long incarceration of over 6 years and the fact that trial in the case is yet to begin. The Court also noted that Michel has been granted bail by the Supreme Court in the predicate offence being probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). "Considering the period of incarceration of about six years and two months undergone by the applicant, and in view of the fact that he has also been granted bail in the case pertaining to predicate offence by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court on the ground that the investigation has not been completed and the trial has not even begun, and considering that there seems to be no possibility of trial in this case concluding too within the remaining duration of the maximum prescribed sentence under Section 4 of PMLA, inasmuch as the same has not even begun as of now, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant," the Court directed.However, the bail is subject to furnishing a personal bond and surety in the sum of ₹5,00,000 each and on surrendering the passport before the trial court.The passport cannot be released without the permission of the High Court, the judge made it clear.This would mean that Michel will have to stay back in India for the time being and would have to take permission from the High Court if he wishes to travel abroad.The trial court can impose other conditions as it deems fit, the High Court clarified.Michel was granted bail by the Supreme Court on February 18 in the CBI case connected to the scam.With bail now being granted in ED case, Michel will walk out of jail..Michel was extradited to India in December 2018 and has been in jail since then.Michel is accused of having entered into as many as twelve contracts with AgustaWestland to legitimize the illicit commission/kickbacks amounting to 42.27 million Euro received on the procurement of VVIP helicopters by the Government of India.According to CBI bribes estimated at US$33 million were transferred through bank accounts in the UK and UAE..During the hearing of the bail plea in the money laundering case, the ED had told the High Court that Michel is a flight risk and could flee the country if granted bail."He is a British citizen so he could run away. He is a flight risk," ED special counsel Zoheb Hossain said.Advocate Aljo Joseph, appearing for Michel, rebutted this argument, citing the expiry of Michel's passport."My passport has already expired. I don’t have a passport," he said.Interestingly, Joseph also said that, once Michel completes the maximum sentence in the offences as an undertrial, he should be released and it then it becomes immaterial whether he remains in India or leaves.Besides Joseph, advocates Sriram Parakkat and MS Vishnu Shankar appeared for Michel..The Court in its order said that though the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) imposes stringent conditions on grant of bail to accused, the present case is an exceptional one since the accused has been behind bars for 6 years and the trial is yet to commence."The present case presents an exceptional situation where the applicant has already been in custody for over six years and two months, yet the trial has not even commenced due to the incomplete investigation. Such prolonged incarceration, without any foreseeable conclusion of trial, would infringe upon the applicant's fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution," the Court said.It also factored in the statutory deadline set by Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) which provides that an accused, who has undergone detention for a period equivalent to one-half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence, should ordinarily be released on bail.In PMLA offences, the maximum punishment is seven years and the threshold under Section 436A CrPC is therefore, 3.5 years, the Court noted."For an offence under Section 4 of PMLA, where the maximum punishment is seven years, the threshold for Section 436A of CrPC would be three and a half years. While the proviso to Section 436A allows courts to extend detention beyond this period in exceptional circumstances, the present case is not one where the applicant's custody is only marginally beyond the halfway mark. Instead, the applicant has been in custody for over six years and two months which is alarmingly close to the maximum punishment – without even being adjudicated guilty," the single-judge said.Given that the trial is unlikely to conclude before the applicant completes even seven years in jail, further incarceration would render the entire purpose of a trial meaningless, the Court held while ordering Michel's release..[Read Order]
