Rakhi Goyal vs Directorate Of Enforcement
2025 Latest Caselaw 4413 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Rakhi Goyal vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 12 August, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137322
 
Reserved on-24.07.2025
 
Delivered on-12.08.2025
 
Court No. - 82
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40804 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Rakhi Goyal
 
Opposite Party :- Directorate Of Enforcement
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Mishra,Sr. Advocate,Vimlendu Tripathi,Vinayak Varma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Pawan Kumar Srivastava,Sushant
 

 
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
 

1. Supplementary affidavit filed by applicant is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sushant Chandra, learned counsel for Enforcement Directorate.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in E.D. Case No. ECIR/LKZO/01/2024,  under Sections 3 & 4 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Police Station- E.D., District- Lucknow,  during pendency of the trial in the court below.

Brief facts of the case

4. On 08.01.2024 a E.C.I.R has been registered against the applicant and four others including her husband Sudhir Kumar Goyal with regard to schedule offences relate to offences under Sections 420, 467, 471, 392, 120B IPC. As per E.C.I.R., total 18 FIRs have been lodged against co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal i.e. husband of the applicant and in three cases, applicant has also been made accused along with him.

5. As per allegation, husband of applicant i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal and others including applicant developed minimum 11 illegal colonies with 100 plots in each and they committed fraud of hundred crores and proceeds of crime involved in 18 cases is Rs. 2.26 crores.

Submissions advanced on behalf of applicant

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicant has been roped in the present matter along with several others including her husband i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal. He further submitted that even from the E.C.I.R., it reflects, co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, the husband of the applicant, is the principal accused. He further submitted that it appears, only being wife of principal accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, applicant has been made accused in the present matter.

7. He further submitted that in the matter, after investigation, charge sheet has been filed and even from the charge sheet, it is apparent that co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, the husband of the applicant, is the principal accused and entire allegation is against him.

8. He further submits, even as far as merit of the case is concerned, however, as per allegations applicant in some cases also involved along with her husband i.e. principal accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal but entire allegations against her is false. He next submits, in majority of the cases, purchasers after taking possession of the properties are residing there after constructing their own houses. He further submitted that even from the record, it could not be reflected that co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal indulged in constructing illegal colonies, as alleged.

9. He further submitted that, however, as per Section 45 Prevention of Money Laundering Act (in short 'PMLA'), an accused detained under the provisions of PMLA shall not be released on bail unless an opportunity is given to public prosecutor to oppose the bail and court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail but as per Proviso Clause of Section 45 PMLA, a person, who is under the age of 16 years or women or sick or infirm, may be released on bail. He further submitted that considering the fact that applicant is lady and even from the material available on record and even as per E.D. it reflects, the alleged fraud and offence of money laundering has been committed by husband of the applicant i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, therefore, in view of Proviso Clause of Section 45 PMLA, she can be released on bail in the instant matter.

10. He further submitted that however apart from the present case under the provisions of PMLA, applicant has also been made accused in 18 other cases but in all the cases, she has been made accused after 03.08.2023 and her entire criminal history has been duly explained in the instant bail application and in all the cases with similar allegations, she has been made accused along with her husband i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal and in majority of the cases, she is on bail. He further submitted that even in all these cases, principal allegation is against husband of the applicant i.e. Sudhir Kumar Goyal and it reflects, in all these cases, applicant has been made accused being wife of co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal like present one.

11. He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 05.03.2024 i.e. for last 17 months. He further submitted that in case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement AIR 2024 SC 4053, the Apex Court observed that even in money laundering cases, bail is rule while jail is an exception and considering the long incarceration of an accused, he can be released on bail, even in PMLA cases.

12. He further submitted that, therefore, considering the above facts, applicant should be enlarged on bail.

Submissions advanced on behalf of E.D.

13. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of E.D. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that, however, from the record, it reflects, principal accused of the case is husband of the applicant i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal but being his wife, applicant equally participated in money laundering along with him and, therefore, it cannot be said that she is innocent.

14. He further submitted that it is a matter of worth of crores, in which, common public has been duped by the applicant, her husband and other accused. He further submitted that even apart from the present case under the provisions of PMLA applicant has also been made accused in 18 other cases but could not dispute the fact that applicant is lady and she is detained in jail in the present matter last 17 months. He further could not dispute the fact that in all these cases also, applicant has been made accused along with her husband i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, who was coloniser and in all these cases her husband is the prime accused. He further could not dispute the fact that as per Proviso Clause of Section 45 PMLA, in appropriate cases, a woman can be released on bail.

Analysis

15. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

16. The E.C.I.R. of the present case has been lodged against the applicant and others including her husband, i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal and as per allegation, applicant and others constructed illegal colonies and committed fraud of several hundred crores but from the entire material available on record, it reflects, co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, the husband of the applicant, was the principal accused, who was colonizer, therefore, at this stage argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that only being wife of co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, applicant has been made accused in the present matter, cannot be completely ruled out.

17. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of about 18 other cases but in all the cases, she has been made accused along with her husband i.e. co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal with almost similar allegations and in majority of the cases, she has been released on bail and in all these cases also her husband appears to be prime accused.

18. Further, however, as per Section 45 PMLA, an accused detained under the provisions of PMLA shall not be released on bail unless an opportunity is given to public prosecutor to oppose the bail and court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail but as per Proviso Clause of Section 45 PMLA a woman or a person, who is under the age of 16 years or sick or infirm, can be released on bail. Therefore, it reflects, in appropriate cases a women can be released on bail even in cases of PMLA. Considering the fact that applicant does not appear to be principal accused and prima facie, it appears, being wife of principal accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal, she has been made accused in the present matter as well as in schedule offences, in view of this Court, she can be released on bail.

19. Further, applicant is detained in jail in the present matter for last more than 17 months. The Apex Court in case of Manish Sisodia (supra) observed that even in PMLA cases, bail is a rule while jail is an exception and on the ground of long incarceration, even in cases of PMLA an accused can be released on bail.

20. Further, as per judgment of the Apex Court passed in case of V. Senthil Balaji Vs. Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement 2024 SCC Online SC 2626, the existence of schedule offence is sine qua non for alleging the existence of proceeds of crime. The existence of proceeds of crime at the time of trial of offence under Section 3 PMLA can be proved only if scheduled offence is established in the prosecution of scheduled offence and, therefore, even if trial of the case under the provisions of PMLA proceeds then also it cannot be finally decided unless trial of the schedule offence concludes. The Apex Court further held that on the ground of long incarceration, an accused can be enlarged on bail, even in PMLA cases, if there is no possibility of conclusion of trial within a reasonable period of time.

21. Considering the above observation of the Apex Court, the possibility of early disposal of trial of the present case appears to be quite remote as there are number of schedule offences and there is no hope that trials of these cases will be concluded in near future. Learned counsel for E.D. also conceded that trials of schedule offences will take time. Therefore, applicant cannot be detained in jail till conclusion of trials of schedule offences. Further, applicant is lady.

22. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

23. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

24. Let the applicant- Rakhi Goyal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and  two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or  any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

25. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the  bail of the applicant.

26. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

Order Date :- 12.08.2025

KK Patel/AK Pandey