The Prevention of Money Laundering Act’s twin conditions make bail notoriously difficult — but they are not a warrant for indefinite pre-trial imprisonment. In Masasasong Ao v. Directorate of Enforcement, BAIL APPLN. 2564/2026, decided on 24 September 2026, the Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused in custody since October 2022, holding that where an undertrial has served about half the maximum sentence and the trial remains substantially incomplete through no fault of his, liberty must prevail.
The custody arithmetic that decided the case
The applicant had been in custody since October 2022 — close to four years by the date of the order. The maximum sentence under Section 4 of the PMLA for the alleged offence is seven years. Half of that ceiling had effectively been served as an undertrial, while the prosecution’s evidence remained substantially unrecorded. Justice Sanjeev Narula’s order rests on the settled proposition that pre-trial detention is not punishment in advance: once its length approaches what a convict might actually serve, the balance of the bail equation shifts decisively toward liberty.
How the court navigated the twin conditions
What this means for undertrials in special-statute cases
| Factor | Weight in the bail calculus |
|---|---|
| Custody period against maximum sentence | The closer to half (or the Section 436A/BNSS threshold), the stronger the claim — even under PMLA, NDPS or UAPA. |
| Progress of trial | Number of witnesses examined versus cited; a stagnant trial favours release. |
| Attribution of delay | Adjournments sought by the accused dilute the argument; prosecution-side delay strengthens it. |
| Conduct in custody and personal circumstances | Employment, family roots and jail record inform the risk assessment. |
Practice pointer: in long-custody bail applications, file a tabulated custody-and-trial chart — date of arrest, chargesheet, charge, each witness summoned and examined, and every adjournment with its author. Courts respond to arithmetic more readily than to adjectives, and this order shows how decisive that arithmetic can be.
The broader trend
The Delhi High Court has in recent months repeatedly granted bail in PMLA and UAPA matters where custody had consumed a substantial fraction of the maximum sentence. The message to investigating agencies is consistent: stringent bail provisions are matched by an obligation to bring cases to trial promptly. Where that obligation fails, the special statute’s rigour will not keep an undertrial in jail indefinitely.
This article is for general information only and is not legal advice or a solicitation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What offences were alleged?
Money laundering under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, with a predicate case involving alleged extortion and illegal taxation, IPC offences including Sections 120-B, 384 and 467, and UAPA provisions. A co-accused was intercepted carrying Rs 72 lakh in cash; the applicant’s defence was that the accounts in his name were substantially controlled by that co-accused.
Why was bail granted despite the PMLA’s strict conditions?
Three findings converged: the applicant’s explanation was viable at the bail stage even though the material warranted trial; there was no credible risk of reoffending given his employment and jail conduct; and he had undergone nearly half the maximum seven-year sentence with the trial nowhere near completion and no delay attributable to him. At that point detention becomes punitive and violates constitutional protections.
What is the principle behind the half-sentence benchmark?
Section 436A CrPC — now carried into the BNSS — embodies the idea that an undertrial who has served a substantial portion of the maximum sentence should ordinarily be released. Constitutional courts have applied the same logic within special statutes, holding that stringent bail thresholds cannot override the right to a speedy trial under Article 21.
What conditions were imposed?
Personal bond of Rs 50,000 with surety, surrender of passport, disclosure of residence, regular attendance, no contact with witnesses and no fresh offences — the standard architecture for economic-offence bail.