Quashing Of Predicate Offence On Basis Of Compromise Does Not Extinguish PMLA Proceedings: Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Accused In ₹766 Crore Money Laundering Case
This Court on considering the conspectus of material brought against the applicant, its own conduct of non-disclosure before the Hyderabad Court, as also the cloud regarding its attempt to leave the country, is not satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offence of money-laundering and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The requirements of Section 45 of the PMLA for the grant of bail, thus, have not been satisfied. Resultantly, the present application deserves to be rejected”, the Bench said. Cause Title: Rohit Vij v. Directorate Of Enforcement (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:6498)
Explanation in simple terms: A Delhi court ruled that even if two parties settle a crime (reach a compromise), the money laundering case can still continue. In a ₹766 crore case, the court denied bail to the accused, saying that settling the original crime doesn't stop the money laundering investigation. Essentially, if money was illegally moved or hidden, that's a separate serious crime that must be prosecuted regardless of any settlement.