Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2024-05-16 allowed

TARSEM LAL vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Bench: 2 — Abhay S. Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan

In Brief

An accused charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) who was not arrested during investigation cannot be compelled to apply for anticipatory bail once the Special Court takes cognizance on a complaint. The Court held that normal CrPC procedures apply to PMLA complaints. When cognizance is taken, a summons (not warrant) should issue if the accused was never arrested. The accused appearing on summons is not in custody and need not apply for bail. The Special Court may direct furnishing of bonds under CrPC Section 88, which is merely an undertaking to appear, not bail. After cognizance, the ED cannot arrest the accused without Special Court permission. Warrants can be cancelled if the accused provides undertakings to appear regularly.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Money Laundering Anticipatory Bail Arrest and Detention Special Statutes Process and Summons

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login