Argument contrary to PMLA: Supreme Court on ED's stance that rigorous bail conditions will apply to women

The Supreme Court on Thursday took strong exception to the argument by Enforcement Directorate (ED) that the rigorous conditions for bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) would apply to women, sick, infirm and persons under sixteen years of age [Shashi Bala @ Shashi Bala Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement]..The Court said that ED's stance seemed to be flying in the face of the PMLA provisions since the proviso to Section 45 grants exception to women, sick, infirm and persons under sixteen years of age.However, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SD Sanjay said on behalf of ED that notwithstanding the beneficial provision, the twin condition for bail in money laundering cases will apply to everyone. A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih took strong exception to this line of argument and said that if the ED is prepared to argue against the statute, the Court would be compelled to ask the Attorney General R Venkataramani to appear in the case."The learned ASG appearing for the Directorate of Enforcement seeks time. Initially, he submitted that even if an accused is a woman, notwithstanding the proviso to sub-Section (1) of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, “the PMLA”), the rigours of clause (ii) of sub-Section (1) of Section 45 of the PMLA will apply. In short, his submission is that even if a person, who, is under the age of sixteen years, or is a woman, or is a sick or infirm person, still the stringent conditions under clause (ii) of sub-Section (1) of Section 45 of the PMLA will apply," the Court had dictated in its order.The Court even expressed surprise at the fact that when called upon to back his arguments, the counsel for ED sought time to respond."You even want time for the submission you made. We want to know how you can argue contrary to statute. Then you will say that we don't hear you. Nowadays lawyers are saying that we don't give them opportunity to argue," Justice Oka orally said.The Court eventually posted the matter for further hearing on January 15..The Court was hearing an appeal preferred by one Shashi Bala Singh, the Indian operative of the real estate company Shine City, challenging the September 10 decision of the Allahabad High Court denying bail to her in a money laundering case.Singh is accused of working with Shine City's owner, Rasheed Naseem, to dupe investors through fraudulent investment schemes.The High Court had denied her bail noting the severity of the case as well as the fact that Naseem was absconding. It had observed that Singh cannot take the benefit of proviso to Section 45 of PMLA."The plea that the applicant is a woman and she has been in custody since November, 2023 and the trial is not likely to conclude soon pales into insignificance at this stage since the main director with whom the applicant was in touch this fact does not bring her in the category of a vulnerable woman, coupled with the proportion of fraud committed as the number of FIR's spread across various States duping very large number of persons does not permit this Court to extend the benefit of the decision of the Apex Court in Kalvakuntla Kavitha (supra) and Manish Sisodia (supra) to the applicant at this stage," the High Court had observed while denying bail to Singh.Aggrieved, Singh approached the apex court..Senior Advocate UK Uniyal and advocates DK Garg, Dhananjay Garg, Abhishek Garg and Ishita Bist appeared for Singh.Additional Solicitor General SD Sanjay appeared for ED..[Read Order].[Live Courtroom Exchange]