Headnote
AI-drafted · Editorially reviewed
The petitioner filed an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with ECIR No. ECIR/HIU-I/138/2025 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA. The ECIR was registered on the basis of multiple predicate FIRs involving allegations of cheating, inducement, fraudulent transactions relating to SARFAESI properties and forged documents, with the primary accused being one Mohit Gogia.
The petitioner contended that he was not named in any of the predicate FIRs at the stage of their registration and that his implication surfaced only during the course of investigation. It was further urged that the petitioner is engaged in the finance business and that mere transfer or receipt of funds through his accounts or those of his firm, in the ordinary course of business, cannot establish that such funds constituted 'proceeds of crime' or that he knowingly participated in any money laundering activity within the meaning of Section 3 of the PMLA. The petitioner also highlighted that his wife, who was arrested in the same ECIR, had already been enlarged on regular bail by the District and Sessions Judge.
The Directorate of Enforcement opposed the application, having previously sought non-bailable warrants against the petitioner and his son during the pendency of an earlier anticipatory bail application before the Sessions Court, which was withdrawn with liberty. The matter was heard on the merits of the twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA governing grant of bail in money laundering cases.
Catchwords:
anticipatory bail
Prevention of Money Laundering Act
proceeds of crime
scheduled offence
SARFAESI properties
cheating
forged documents
Directorate of Enforcement
ECIR
twin conditions
Section 3 PMLA
Section 4 PMLA
Section 19 PMLA
Section 45 PMLA
Section 50 PMLA
BNSS Section 482
custodial remand
knowledge and participation
money laundering
© LegalFirms.in — Headnote is proprietary. Raw judgment text is in the public domain
per Section 52(1)(p) of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Full Judgment Text
[Cites 45, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court - Orders
Ram Singh vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 18 August, 2026
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
# CNR No. DLHC010270632026
+ BAIL APPLN. 2393/2026
RAM SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
along with Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Mr.
Mahender Shukla, Mr. Siddharth,
Advs.
versus
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Vivek G., Panel Counsel with Mr.
Kanishk Maurya, Mr. Chabinandan
Patra, Advs. Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Mr.
Rajeev Aggarwal and Mr. Mayank
Kamra & Mr. Ankit Gupta, Advs. fo
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools.
For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
From ₹167/month.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.