No Fixed Timeline Under PMLA to Forward Arrest Material to Adjudicating Authority

1. Core Facts & Background

• The assessee was accused of orchestrating an intricate network of financial transactions to artificially inflate corporate turnover.
• It was alleged that credit was fraudulently obtained from a bank consortium and diverted to shell companies for personal gain.
• The assessee had undergone approximately 20 months of custody out of a maximum statutory punishment of seven years.
• Aggrieved by the denial of regular bail by the lower appellate forum, the assessee escalated the matter before the apex judicial authority.

2. Revenue / Department’s Action

• Revenue arrested the assessee for alleged money laundering offenses involving dummy directors and related-party entities.
• The department produced the assessee before the designated trial forum within the mandated 24-hour window.
• Revenue forwarded the arrest order along with the underlying seized material to the Adjudicating Authority after an interval of five days.
• The department contended that procedural steps following arrest cannot be treated as a prerequisite sanction and five days did not invalidate the custody.

3. Assessee’s Defense & Arguments

• The assessee contended that the arrest was void ab initio due to non-compliance with the statutory mandate to transmit material immediately.
• It was argued that a five-day delay in sending the arrest order and records violated procedural safeguards under the governing statute.
• The assessee maintained that because the foundational arrest was illegal, the stringent statutory bar on regular bail could not be applied.
• The defense also highlighted that protracted incarceration prior to trial infringed upon guaranteed constitutional rights.

4. Final Ruling & Outcome

• The bench held that the statutory term requiring immediate transmission of arrest documents does not impose a rigid 24-hour or fixed timeframe.
• It was ruled that administrative assimilation of massive case records warrants reasonable time, meaning a five-day transmission does not render an arrest invalid.
• The court granted regular bail, holding that statutory bail restrictions cannot override the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty during a lengthy trial.