"Section 45 PMLA cannot justify indefinite detention," SC grants bail to former Rajasthan Minister

The Supreme Court has on December 3, 2025 granted bail to senior Congress leader and former Rajasthan Minister Mahesh Joshi in a money laundering case filed on allegations concerning forged IRCON certificates used in PHED tenders in 2022–2023.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih considered that Joshi is 71 years of age, his earlier conduct while he availed the benefit of the interim bail, and the nature of the material which was entirely documentary and already in the possession of the investigating agency, to grant him relief after being in custody for seven months.

The court also pointed out, in V Senthil Balaji Vs Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement (2024) wherein it was held that where a trial cannot be reasonably concluded and incarceration becomes prolonged, constitutional courts must intervene to safeguard the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. 

The court further emphasised that Section 45(1)(ii) of the PMLA cannot be interpreted to justify indefinite detention in cases involving voluminous, document-heavy material where trial is unlikely to begin promptly. "The present case, in our view, stands on a similar footing,'' the bench said.   

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for Joshi, submitted that four co-accused, namely, Peeyush Jain, Sanjay Badaya, Padam Chand Jain, and Mahesh Mittal, have already been granted bail either by this court or the High Court and that the appellant stands on at least the same footing, thereby attracting parity. The amount directly attributed to the appellant does not exceed ₹50 lakh, attracting the proviso to Section 45(1) of the PMLA. The High Court, while declining bail, did not assign any reasons for the nonapplication of the proviso, he said.

In fact, during his tenure as Minister, the appellant himself took departmental action by suspending officials, blacklisting firms and causing registration of FIRs relating to forged certificates. These steps negate any inference of personal benefit, Luthra added. He further said, the appellant is 71 years old, has deep roots in society, and has cooperated throughout the investigation. The appellant availed interim bail on two occasions and surrendered punctually, without any allegation of misuse.

On the contrary, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju for the Enforcement Directorate contended the allegations relate to serious economic offences. He referred to what the agency described as a financial trail involving movement of funds through M/s Mugdog Packaging India LLP, M/s Maxclenz Retail Pvt. Ltd, and M/s Jay The Victory, before reaching the firm of the appellant’s son, M/s Sumangalam LLP. According to the ED, the layering of transactions is consistent with money laundering methods. He claimed the ₹50 lakh entry is not isolated and forms part of a larger financial pattern which, according to the agency, totals ₹2.01 crore. The appellant, being a senior political figure, may influence witnesses who were departmental officials or contractors, Raju added.  

Allowing the appeal, the bench however noted, ''Upon considering the material placed before us, we find that several co-accused, whose alleged roles will ultimately be evaluated at trial, have already been granted bail. The appellant has remained in custody for over seven months.'' The court also found that the record is entirely documentary, as of now there are 66 witnesses, 184 documents, and more than 14,600 pages are involved, and the proceedings are still at the stage of supply of copy of the police report and other documents under Section 207, CrPC. 

The court opined, the concerns expressed by the ED can be addressed through imposition of appropriate conditions.  "At this stage, continued detention does not appear necessary for the purpose of investigation or the conduct of the trial, as no further recovery is expected,'' it said.

Court held that Joshi deserved to be released on bail with conditions that he would surrender his passport to the Special Court under the PMLA; not leave India without prior permission; and regularly and punctually remain present before the Special Court and cooperate with the court for early disposal of the case.

Case Title: Sh. Mahesh Joshi v. Directorate of Enforcement

Pronouncement Date: December 3, 2025

Bench: Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih