In short. Under section 45 PMLA, bail needs a hearing of the public prosecutor and reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to offend on bail. Women, the sick or infirm, persons under 16 and those accused of laundering under ₹1 crore can be released without both conditions. Default bail, long custody with a delayed trial, and appearance on summons after cognizance are separate routes.
This post is about bail once a person has been arrested by the Enforcement Directorate, or fears arrest. If you have only received a summons so far, our post on preparing for an ED summons under section 50 is the better starting point. For bail under the ordinary criminal law, see our bail practice page.
Families usually come to us within hours of an ED arrest, having heard that bail in PMLA cases is almost impossible. That reputation comes from the years after 2018, when the twin conditions were applied very strictly. The position in 2026 is more balanced. The conditions remain on the statute book and the Supreme Court upheld them in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v Union of India (2022), but later decisions have made clear that they must be applied with the right to liberty in mind, and that they do not justify keeping an undertrial in jail indefinitely.
- The law
- Section 45, PMLA 2002, read with BNSS s.480 to 483
- Twin conditions
- Reasonable grounds to believe not guilty, and not likely to offend on bail
- Prosecutor
- Must be given an opportunity to oppose
- Exceptions
- Under 16, woman, sick or infirm; sum under ₹1 crore
- Applies to
- Regular and anticipatory bail
- Bail court in Delhi
- PMLA special court at Rouse Avenue, then High Court
What are the twin conditions in section 45 PMLA?
Section 45(1) says no person accused of an offence under the PMLA shall be released on bail unless two things happen. First, the public prosecutor is given an opportunity to oppose the application. Second, where the prosecutor opposes, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. These are the twin conditions.
They apply in addition to the ordinary bail considerations under the BNSS: the gravity of the offence, the risk of flight, the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. A court that finds the twin conditions met still has to be satisfied on those ordinary points. A court that finds them not met cannot grant bail on ordinary grounds alone, unless a proviso or another route applies.
The history explains why lawyers argue so hard about the wording. In 2017 the Supreme Court struck down an earlier version of section 45 that linked the conditions to other offences. Parliament amended the section in 2018 so that it applies to every offence under the Act, and in Vijay Madanlal the Supreme Court upheld the amended provision, holding that it has a reasonable nexus with the purpose of the law. The same judgment held that the conditions apply to anticipatory bail too.
What does reasonable grounds for believing not guilty mean in practice?
It does not mean the court must be convinced of innocence, and it does not mean a mini-trial. The court looks at the material the ED has collected, as it stands at the bail stage, and asks whether there are genuine, substantial reasons to think the accused may not be guilty of money laundering. The finding is limited to bail and does not bind the trial court.
In practice the argument usually takes one of a few shapes. The money the ED calls proceeds of crime has a lawful, documented source that predates the predicate offence. The accused did not know the money was tainted, and the material shows no knowledge. The accused's role was clerical or peripheral, such as signing as a nominee director without control of the accounts. The scheduled offence itself is weak, stayed or closed. Or the amounts and dates in the ED's chart simply do not line up with the bank statements.
When Advocate B.K. Singh prepares a section 45 argument, he builds it from the ED's own documents first: the grounds of arrest, the remand application and, if filed, the prosecution complaint. An argument that shows a gap in the ED's money trail, using the ED's own figures, carries far more weight with a special court than a general plea that the client is a respectable person.
The second condition: not likely to commit an offence while on bail
The second limb looks forward. The court asks whether there is reason to fear the accused will commit any offence if released, not just money laundering. Clean antecedents, a fixed residence, family ties, a regular occupation and good conduct during the investigation all help. Other pending cases, especially economic offences, hurt.
This limb is easier to meet than the first for most first-time accused, but it should not be assumed. If the ED alleges that the accused moved money or deleted data after receiving summonses, the court may treat that as a sign of future conduct. A short, factual answer to each such allegation, with documents, is better than a broad denial.
Courts also look at whether the investigation is complete. Where the ED has filed its prosecution complaint and the evidence is largely documentary and already seized, the risk that release will lead to further offences or tampering is usually lower, and the argument for bail is stronger.
Which bail test applies in which situation?
The right route depends on how the person came before the court and how long he has been in custody.
| Situation | Route | Do the twin conditions apply? |
|---|---|---|
| Arrested by ED under section 19 during investigation | Regular bail before the special court, then the High Court (BNSS s.483) | Yes |
| Fears arrest after a summons | Anticipatory bail (BNSS s.482) | Yes, as held in Vijay Madanlal |
| Woman, person under 16, or sick or infirm | Regular bail invoking the first proviso to s.45(1) | No; the court has discretion |
| Accused of laundering less than ₹1 crore, alone or with co-accused | Regular bail invoking the second proviso | No; the court has discretion |
| Not arrested; appears before special court on summons after cognizance | Bond for appearance (BNSS s.91), as in Tarsem Lal | No |
| Prosecution complaint not filed within the statutory period | Default bail (BNSS s.187) | No; it is a statutory right |
| Long custody, trial not started or moving slowly | Bail under Article 21 and BNSS s.479 | Conditions read down by the right to speedy trial |
The provisos: women, the sick and infirm, and cases under ₹1 crore
The first proviso to section 45(1) allows a person under sixteen, a woman, or a person who is sick or infirm to be released on bail if the special court so directs, without satisfying the twin conditions. The second proviso allows the same for a person accused, alone or with co-accused, of laundering a sum of less than ₹1 crore.
These provisos give the court a discretion, not an automatic right. The court still weighs the ordinary factors: role, flight risk, tampering. But the starting point is different. In Kalvakuntla Kavitha v Directorate of Enforcement (2024), the Supreme Court said the benefit for women should not be refused merely because the accused is educated or socially well placed; the proviso is meant to be applied, not explained away.
For sickness, the court wants evidence, not a general assertion. A medical bail application should include recent records from a recognised hospital, the treating doctor's opinion, and, where the person is in jail, the jail hospital's records. Courts often call for a report from a government medical board. Exaggerated medical claims are checked and tend to damage credibility for later applications.
Tarsem Lal: appearing on summons after the court takes cognizance
Not every PMLA accused is arrested during investigation. Often the ED files its prosecution complaint under section 44 without arresting some of the persons named, and the special court takes cognizance and issues summons. In Tarsem Lal v Directorate of Enforcement (2024), the Supreme Court held that an accused who appears before the special court in response to such a summons is not in custody, and need not apply for bail at all.
The court can direct him to furnish a bond for his appearance under the provision that corresponds to section 88 of the old Code, now section 91 of the BNSS, and the twin conditions do not apply to that. After cognizance, the ED cannot arrest such an accused on its own; if it wants custody, it has to apply to the special court, which will allow it only if custodial interrogation is shown to be necessary.
The protection is lost if the accused does not appear and the court issues a warrant. He then has to apply for bail, and section 45 applies. The practical lesson is simple: if you are summoned by the special court in a PMLA complaint, appear on the date, with an advocate and with sureties ready.
Default bail when the ED does not file its complaint in time
Default bail is a statutory right, and section 45 does not take it away. If a person is arrested and the investigating agency does not file its final report within the period fixed by section 187 of the BNSS, the accused can apply for release. In PMLA cases, the prosecution complaint under section 44 is treated as the final report for this purpose.
Money laundering under section 4 is punishable with three to seven years, so the period is generally sixty days from the first remand. Where the scheduled offence is under the NDPS Act, the punishment can go up to ten years, and the longer ninety day period is then generally applied. The application must be made after the period expires and before the complaint is filed; once the complaint is on record, the right is lost.
Disputes often arise over when the period began, and whether a complaint filed in time was complete. These are technical arguments that turn on dates in the order sheet. Our post on default bail when the chargesheet is not filed explains how the period is counted.
Long custody and delayed trials: bail is still the rule
Several 2024 decisions changed the practical position. In Manish Sisodia v Directorate of Enforcement (2024), the Supreme Court granted bail after about seventeen months in custody, holding that a long period of incarceration without the trial starting violated the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, and that the twin conditions could not be used to keep a person in jail as punishment. In Prem Prakash v Union of India (2024), the Court said the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception applies to PMLA cases too; section 45 restricts bail but does not abolish it.
In V. Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director (2024), the Court applied the reasoning of Union of India v K.A. Najeeb (2021): where a statute restricts bail but the trial is unlikely to finish in a reasonable time, constitutional courts can grant bail despite the restriction. PMLA cases often involve dozens of accused, thousands of pages of documents and a parallel trial in the predicate case, so delay is common.
Section 479 of the BNSS adds a statutory ceiling. An undertrial who has spent half the maximum sentence in custody is to be released, and a first-time offender after one third, subject to exceptions such as more than one pending case. The Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal accepted that the old equivalent, section 436A, applies to PMLA cases. With a seven year maximum, the arithmetic is worth doing early; our post on undertrial release under section 479 BNSS explains it.
Building a PMLA bail application, step by step
A bail application in an ED case is won or lost on preparation. This is the order in which we usually work.
Collect the arrest papers
Get the written grounds of arrest, the arrest memo, the remand application and every remand order. The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal (2023) held that grounds must be given in writing, and in Arvind Kejriwal (2024) that the reasons to believe must be furnished, subject to limited court-approved redaction.
Check the arrest itself
Compare the date and time of arrest, production before the court within 24 hours, and the documents given. A defect in the arrest procedure is a separate ground, argued alongside bail or in a petition challenging the arrest.
Find the predicate offence status
Get the FIR, chargesheet or complaint in the scheduled offence and its current stage. If the accused has been granted bail, discharged, or the case stayed or quashed there, that changes the PMLA argument substantially.
Map the money
Prepare a simple chart of the transactions the ED relies on, with the accused's documents for each: source of funds, invoices, tax returns, loan papers. Show where the ED's chart is wrong or incomplete.
Decide the route
Decide whether the application rests on the twin conditions, a proviso, default bail, Tarsem Lal, long custody, or a combination. Each needs different supporting material, and mixing weak grounds with strong ones can dilute the strong ones.
Draft and file in the special court
File before the special court with an index of documents, a list of dates and a short note of submissions. Serve the public prosecutor for the ED in good time, since section 45 requires that he be heard.
Prepare for conditions
Have sureties identified, with their identity and property or bank documents, and be ready to offer passport surrender, residence within the NCR and regular reporting. A clear proposal on conditions often helps a court that is hesitating.
What the special court actually reads
Special courts dealing with PMLA bail in Delhi sit at the Rouse Avenue court complex. The judge typically has the ED's reply, the bail application, and the case diary or sealed material that the ED produces. In practice, the decision often turns on a few documents: the statements recorded under section 50, the money trail chart, and the role attributed to the accused in the predicate case.
The defence can ask for documents that the ED holds but does not rely on. In Sarla Gupta v Directorate of Enforcement (2025), the Supreme Court held that an accused is entitled to a list of unrelied documents, and at the bail stage can apply, under the provision that is now section 94 of the BNSS, for documents needed to meet the case; the ED can object if disclosure would prejudice a pending investigation, and the court decides after seeing them.
Statements under section 50 deserve close reading. A co-accused's statement is not substantive evidence by itself, and a statement taken from an accused who was already in ED custody in another case cannot be used against him, as Prem Prakash held. Showing that the ED's case for the first twin condition rests mainly on such statements can make a real difference. How the ECIR and the arrest papers relate is explained in our post on the ECIR and whether you can get a copy.
Where to apply: special court, High Court, Supreme Court
Start in the special court. The High Court has concurrent power under section 483 of the BNSS, but it usually expects the accused to approach the special court first, and the special court's reasoned order is useful when the matter goes up. Anticipatory bail can be sought from the Sessions Court designated as the special court or from the High Court.
If the special court refuses bail, the next step is a bail application before the High Court, not an appeal in the technical sense. If the High Court refuses, a special leave petition under Article 136 lies to the Supreme Court; our post on the special leave petition in the Supreme Court covers the time limit and format, and our Supreme Court practice page explains how matters are filed through an Advocate-on-Record.
Repeat applications in the same court need a change in circumstances: the complaint has been filed, a co-accused with a similar role has been granted bail, several months have passed without trial, health has worsened. A second application that repeats the first, with no new fact, is usually dismissed quickly and can make the next court more cautious.
A made-up example: the nominee director
Here's a made-up example. Rakesh, a retired government clerk living in Dwarka, was made a director of two companies by his nephew, who ran them. The CBI later registered a bank fraud case against the nephew, and the ED arrested both of them. The ED alleges that ₹3.2 crore of loan money was routed through one of Rakesh's companies.
The first bail application, filed in a hurry, argued only age and clean antecedents, and was rejected because the court found nothing that showed reasonable grounds to believe he was not guilty. For the second application, his advocate collected the companies' bank mandates, which showed that only the nephew could operate the accounts, emails in which the nephew instructed the bank directly, and Rakesh's own modest pension account. The complaint had also been filed by then, and Rakesh, at 68, had a documented cardiac condition.
The second application relied on the first twin condition, with documents showing no control over the money, and on the sick or infirm proviso, with hospital records. In this made-up case bail is granted with conditions. A real case depends on its own record, but the shift from character to documents is the lesson.
Papers to collect for a PMLA bail application
From the ED case
- Written grounds of arrest and arrest memo
- Reasons to believe, if furnished
- Remand applications and all remand orders
- Prosecution complaint and documents, if filed
- Any summonses and copies of documents produced
From the predicate case
- FIR or CBI case and any chargesheet
- Bail orders of the accused or co-accused
- Any stay, discharge or quashing order
- Current stage and next date of hearing
About the accused
- Income tax returns and bank statements for the relevant years
- Documents for the source of each disputed amount
- Medical records, if health is relied on
- Proof of residence, family and occupation
- Surety documents: identity, address, property or bank papers
Bail conditions you should expect
Bail in PMLA cases almost always comes with conditions. The usual ones are surrender of the passport, no travel abroad without the court's permission, residence at a stated address, appearance on every date, not contacting witnesses or co-accused about the case, and sometimes reporting to the ED or the court at intervals. Some orders bar the accused from holding a particular office or from dealing with particular assets during the trial.
The court cannot use conditions to make bail impossible, and conditions that turn out to be unworkable can be changed. A person who has to travel abroad for business or treatment applies to the special court for permission, with details and an undertaking to return. Our post on modifying bail conditions covers the procedure.
Breaching a condition is the quickest way to lose bail. The ED watches closely, and an application for cancellation can follow any unauthorised travel, contact with a witness or dealing in attached property. The grounds on which courts cancel bail are set out in our post on bail cancellation grounds.
Arguments that rarely work, and those that often do
- Rarely works: the accused is a respectable person. Standing and reputation are not reasons to believe a person is not guilty, and courts say so.
- Rarely works: the money has been returned. Repayment may matter in the predicate case, but in a PMLA case the offence is dealing with proceeds, and repayment does not undo it.
- Rarely works: the ED arrested others first. The order in which co-accused were arrested says little about the strength of the case against you.
- Often helps: a documented lawful source. Bank records, tax returns and loan papers showing where the money came from, dated before the alleged crime.
- Often helps: parity with a co-accused on bail. Where a co-accused with the same or a greater role has been released, the court is expected to explain any different treatment.
- Often helps: time in custody against the pace of trial. Number of accused, witnesses and documents, and the stage of the predicate trial, set out precisely.
If the predicate case weakens or collapses
A PMLA case depends on the scheduled offence. In Vijay Madanlal the Supreme Court held that if the person is finally discharged or acquitted of the scheduled offence, or the criminal case against him is quashed, there can be no offence of money laundering against him or anyone claiming through him in respect of that property. That is a complete answer, not just a bail ground.
Short of that, developments in the predicate case still matter for bail. A stay of the FIR by the High Court, a closure report, a chargesheet that drops the accused, or a finding in a connected case that the transaction was civil, all go to whether there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty. Keep the bail court informed of every such order, with certified copies.
The link also works the other way. If the predicate case is strengthened, for example by a chargesheet that names the accused in detail, the ED will rely on it. Bail strategy in a PMLA case has to watch two courts at once, which is why the predicate case should be handled with the same care.
If a family member has just been arrested by the ED
- Get the written grounds of arrest and the arrest memo, or ask the advocate to obtain them
- Note the date and time of arrest and of production before the special court
- Find the FIR or case number of the scheduled offence and its current stage
- Collect tax returns, bank statements and property papers for the accused
- Gather medical records if the accused has any illness
- Identify two sureties and collect their identity and address proof
- Do not contact witnesses or co-accused about the case
- Keep every court order and remand order in one file, in date order
Getting the first application right
The first bail application in a PMLA case shapes everything that follows. A weak first application, rejected with a reasoned order, becomes the document the ED quotes in the High Court. A well-prepared one, even if it is refused at the special court stage, builds the record for the next court. That is why the time spent collecting the arrest papers and mapping the money in the first week is rarely wasted.
If a family member has been arrested and you want an advocate to read the grounds of arrest and the remand papers, the team of Advocate B.K. Singh at B.K. Singh & Associates can look at them and tell you which bail route fits. Our pages on money laundering cases and ED cases describe the wider process, and you can send the details through our online enquiry page.
Frequently asked questions
Is bail possible in a PMLA case?
Yes. Section 45 makes bail harder by adding the twin conditions, but courts grant bail where the record shows reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty, under the provisos, on default, or where custody has been long and the trial is delayed.
Do the twin conditions apply to anticipatory bail in PMLA cases?
Yes. The Supreme Court held in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (2022) that section 45 applies to anticipatory bail as well. So an anticipatory bail application in an ED case needs material showing reasonable grounds to believe the applicant is not guilty.
Can a woman get bail easily in a PMLA case?
The first proviso to section 45 lets the special court release a woman without meeting the twin conditions. It is a discretion, not an automatic right, and the court still considers role and tampering, but in Kalvakuntla Kavitha (2024) the Supreme Court said the benefit should not be denied just because she is educated or well placed.
What is the ₹1 crore rule for PMLA bail?
The second proviso to section 45 allows a person accused, alone or with co-accused, of laundering less than ₹1 crore to be released without meeting the twin conditions, if the special court so directs. The amount is what the ED alleges was laundered, not the total turnover.
How long does the ED have to file its complaint before default bail?
Generally sixty days from the first remand, because money laundering is punishable with up to seven years. Where the scheduled offence is under the NDPS Act, the maximum rises to ten years and the period is generally ninety days. The application must be made before the complaint is filed.
Does the accused need bail if he was never arrested and appears on summons?
Under Tarsem Lal (2024), an accused who appears before the special court on summons after cognizance is not in custody and need not apply for bail. The court may take a bond for appearance, and the twin conditions do not apply to it.
Can the ED arrest someone after the special court takes cognizance?
Not on its own. After cognizance, if the accused appears on summons, the ED must apply to the special court for custody, and the court allows it only if custodial interrogation is shown to be necessary.
Can bail be granted in PMLA because the trial is taking too long?
Yes. The Supreme Court in Manish Sisodia (2024) and V. Senthil Balaji (2024) granted bail on the ground of long custody and delayed trial, holding that section 45 cannot be used to keep an undertrial in jail indefinitely.
Which court hears PMLA bail in Delhi?
The special PMLA courts at the Rouse Avenue court complex hear bail first. If bail is refused, the accused can apply to the Delhi High Court under section 483 of the BNSS, and then approach the Supreme Court by special leave petition.
Does bail in the predicate case mean bail in the PMLA case?
No. The two cases are separate, and the PMLA court applies section 45. But bail, discharge or a stay in the predicate case is relevant, and a final discharge, acquittal or quashing of the scheduled offence ends the PMLA case for that property.
Can I travel abroad while on bail in an ED case?
Usually only with the special court's permission, since passport surrender is a common condition. Apply with travel details, the purpose, a return ticket and an undertaking to return, and expect the ED to be heard.
How long does a PMLA bail application take to decide?
It varies with the court's list and the ED's time to reply. The special court usually gives the ED a short time to file a reply and then hears arguments; urgent medical applications can be listed quickly. No advocate can promise a date for a decision.
Written and reviewed at B.K. Singh & Associates
Advocate B.K. Singh
Founder of B.K. Singh & Associates. MCA, LL.B., LL.M., with more than twenty years of practice before the Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court, district courts and tribunals across Delhi NCR. This article explains the general law as of 24 October 2026; it is not legal advice on your facts.