The Delhi High Court recently delivered a significant ruling, emphasizing that participation in protests should not automatically disqualify an individual from bail in cases pursued under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This judgment was rendered by Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani while granting bail to Wahidur Rahman, an activist associated with the Popular Front of India (PFI).
Key Details of the Case
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opposed Rahman’s bail on the grounds that he had participated in protests organized by PFI against the ban on the organization. Additionally, the ED accused him of involvement in an incident where a petrol bomb was allegedly thrown. However, the Delhi High Court pointed out that these allegations pertained to activities before PFI was declared an “unlawful association.”
Justice Bhambhani remarked, “Participation in protest activities, regardless of how unseemly the form of protest may be alleged to have been, cannot at this stage be treated as a determinative factor for denying bail in a PMLA prosecution, especially when the primary focus of the allegation concerns the financial transactions alleged to have been undertaken by the petitioner.”
Financial Allegations and Court Observations
Wahidur Rahman was arrested on March 20, 2025, and accused of facilitating financial transactions for the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), which the ED claims operated as a front for PFI. The ED alleged that Rahman, who worked as a physical education trainer for PFI, helped in routing funds by depositing them into bank accounts, which were then transferred to SDPI accounts under the guise of donations. According to the investigation, SDPI accounts received over ₹32.94 crore from 2010 to 2025, with large cash deposits aimed at obscuring the actual sources of funds.
Despite these allegations, the Court noted that the charges against Rahman involved only a small sum of ₹3.15 lakh, which is significantly below the ₹1 crore threshold specified under the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA, a provision that outlines stringent bail conditions. Furthermore, the Court highlighted that Rahman was named as an accused only in the seventh supplementary prosecution complaint filed in May 2025, even though the investigation commenced in 2022.
Legal Representation
The legal team for Wahidur Rahman included Advocates Adit S Pujari, A Nowfal, Shaikh Saipan Dastgir, Manvendra Singh Sekhawat, Prerna Mukherjee, Mohd Arif, and Mansoor Ali. The Enforcement Directorate was represented by Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, Panel Counsel Vivek Gurnani, and Advocates Pranjal Tripathi and Chinmay Anand Panigrahi.
The case citation is Wahidur Rahman vs Directorate Of Enforcement, Delhi HC, reported by LawLens.
The High Court’s decision underscores the importance of context and proportionality in evaluating bail applications under the PMLA, particularly when allegations are not directly related to the core financial misconduct targeted by the Act.
