Keywords: arbitrary, woman, classify, education, bail.
Court held that women can’t be classified on basis of their education, occupation or standard of life under proviso to section 45(1) PMLA and no twin condition would be allowed on them for granting bail.
Definition of ‘women’ falling under this section has no intention to create any kind of ad-hoc sub-classification of women based on illusionary assumptions who belongs to high society or from a backward class. Also, this classification if done would violate the right to equality under article 14 and would cause a great injustice to intention of Indian Literature.
In a money laundering case, Preeti Chandra was a fashion designer and philanthropist by profession. So, her bail was on hold but her counsel argued to grant her bail as she was a woman and her profession can’t be used as a twin condition as she falls under the proviso to section 45(1) PMLA. On the other hand, opposition counsel ( Enforcement Directorate, ED) argued that she was not a household lady, even before marriage she was running business. So, she was a well- settled and educated women ,so under the aforesaid section, these qualifications should be taken into consideration.
Sub-classification done by ED was considered as arbitrary and against the spirit the constitutional spirit. Section 45 of PMLA granting beneficial legislation should be given the authority of liberal interpretation without narrowing down it’s spirit. This provision although should not allow sub-classification and all accused if women come into it’s proviso but still there is need to satisfy triple test for grant of bail by the applicant.
In the case also, twin condition was not applied but triple test was taken through all care and bail was granted to her by the order of court.
Name ; Chanchal, College Name ; GLA University, Semester 2nd, an intern under Legal Vidhiya
0 Comments