THOMAS DANIEL Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The constitutional courts are entrusted with the solemn function of protecting the liberty of the individual, which manifests as fundamental rights. Punishment before conviction is the antithesis of the rule of law. When the liberty of an individual is pitted against the remote possibility of a conviction much later, the scales of balance must lean in favour of the former. The above prefatory observations are necessary in this case.

(2.) Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.ECIR No.KCZO/32/2020 on the files of the Directorate of Enforcement, Kochi, alleging offences punishable under sec. 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short 'PML Act'). Petitioner seeks regular bail under sec. 45 of the PML Act.

(3.) Prosecution alleges that petitioner and the other accused had cheated many depositors by collecting fixed deposits without authority, after promising to pay interest and failed to pay either the interest or repay the amounts collected and thereby committed the offence of breach of trust and cheating. The amounts so collected were allegedly used as untainted money for the acquisition of property and has thus committed an offence under sec. 3 of the PML Act.