LexARVIND DHAM versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2026] 1 S.C.R. 119 : 2026 INSC 12 Arvind Dham v. Directorate of Enforcement (Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2026) 06 January 2026 [Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe*, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the appellant-promoter and non-executive Chairman of a group entity, entitled to bail in a money laundering case when there has been long period of incarceration and the trial has not even commenced. Headnotes† Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 – s.45 – Money Laundering – Alleged bank fraud running into several hundred crores – Entitlement to bail – FIRs registered at the instance of public sector banks alleging fraud to the extent of INR 385.35 crores and INR 289 crores respectively by the appellant-former promoter and non-executive Chairman of ‘A’ company and non-executive Director of another entity, along with other individuals – On basis thereof, ECIRs registered alleging laundering of proceeds of crime – Allegation against the appellant that he is the ultimate beneficiary of the fraud executed at his behest, involving diversion and siphoning of public funds through layered entities – Appellant summoned, statement recorded, search carried out, and was arrested in June 2024 – Prosecution complaint and thereafter supplementary prosecution complaint filed against accused persons-individuals and companies, citing large number of prosecution witnesses, and cognizance of prosecution complaint was yet to be taken – Bail application by the appellant, rejected by Special Judge as also the High Court – Challenge to: Held: Right to speedy trial, enshrined u/Art.21 not eclipsed by the nature of the offence – Prolonged incarceration of an under trial, without commencement or reasonable progress of trial, cannot be countenanced, as it has the effect of converting * Author 120 [2026] 1 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports pretrial detention into form of punishment – Economic offences, by their very nature, may differ in degree and fact, and thus, cannot be treated as homogeneous class warranting a blanket denial of bail – On facts, no likelihood of trial commencing in the near future – Continued incarceration in such circumstances, where the evidence which is primarily documentary in nature, already in custody of the prosecution, violates the right of the appellant to speedy trial u/Art.21 – Appellant has cooperated with the investigation and investigation qua the appellant has concluded – Out of 28 individuals, only the appellant was arrested – Maximum sentence which can be imposed on the appellant is seven years – Appellant is in custody for past around 16 months and 20 days – No cognizance has been taken on the prosecution complaint and the proceeding is at the stage of scrutiny of documents – There are 210 witnesses to be examined in the proceeding – Allegation with regard to influencing the witness, does not inspire confidence, since the appellant has been in custody prior to concerned witness being formally arrayed as a witness – Delay in the trial attributable only to the respondent, not the appellant – Allegation of dissipation of proceeds of crime by him untenable at this stage – Thus, the impugned judgment and order quashed and set aside – Appellant to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial. [Paras 18-23] Case Law Cited Manish Sisodia v. Enforcement Directorate [2024] 8 SCR 1061 : (2024) 12 SCC 660; Padam Chand Jain v. Enforcement Directorate, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1291; Udhaw Singh v. Directorate Enforcement, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 357; Prem Prakash v. Union of India, SLP (Crl.) No.691 of 2023; Dineshchand Surana v. Asst. Director, ED, SLP (Crl.) No.15274 of 2024; Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb [2021] 1 SCR 443 : (2021) 3 SCC 713; Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, SLP (Crl.) No.16953 of 2025; Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan (2004) 7 SCC 528; B. Rajesh Ranjan Yadav v. CBI [2006] Supp. 9 SCR 40 : (2007) 1 SCC 70; Bimal Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement, SLP (Crl.) No. 7942/2021; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI [2022] 10 SCR 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51; Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [2024] 7 SCR 992 : (2024) 9 SCC 813; V. Senthil Balaji v. Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate [2024] 10 SCR 393 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2626; Kalvakuntla [2026] 1 S.C.R. 121 Arvind Dham v. Directorate of Enforcement Kavitha v. Directorate of Enforcement [2024] 8 SCR 717 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2269; Sanjay Agarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.