New Delhi: Given Christian Michel’s six-year-long pre-trial custody, that he was bailed in the CBI’s bribery case against him and the low likelihood of a trial in the money laundering case against him finishing anytime soon, the Delhi high court has given him bail in the latter case as well.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Tuesday (March 4) noted that British national Michel has been in custody for six years and two months, which she said was “alarmingly close to the maximum punishment” of seven years’ imprisonment under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
During this time he has not been found guilty, the judge recalled, adding that as the trial in the Enforcement Directorate (ED)’s money laundering case was unlikely to complete in the next ten months, his “further incarceration would render the entire purpose of a trial meaningless”.
His “exceptional” situation, in which there is no “foreseeable” conclusion of a trial, would “infringe upon [his] fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the constitution”, Justice Sharma also said.
Michel is accused of serving as a middleman and facilitating the payment of bribes to Indian officials to ink a deal with the AgustaWestland firm to provide 12 ‘VVIP’ helicopters to the Union defence ministry; he is also accused of laundering the proceeds of his crime.
Extradited to India from the UAE in 2018, the armaments consultant has been accused by the CBI of bribery and by the ED of money laundering.
Neither agency has completed its investigation and the trial in either case is yet to begin.
The Supreme Court granted him bail in the CBI case on February 18. It had noted that “despite [the CBI’s] filing three charge-sheets and two supplementary charge-sheets, the investigation is still on going”.
“You will not be able to conclude trial in another 25 years going by what your conduct has been,” Supreme Court Justice Sandeep Mehta was quoted as having saying by LiveLaw.
Michel’s counsel argued in the Delhi high court that there was no material evidence linking him to his alleged crime and that his continued detention without trial constituted pre-trial punishment.
The ED, a Union government financial crimes agency, argued that Michel was a flight risk, that jail and not bail should be the ‘rule’ in money laundering cases given their ‘gravity’, and that he did not meet the ‘twin conditions’ for bail as per the PMLA.
The twin conditions that accused persons must demonstrate are that there are reasonable grounds to believe they did not commit the offence in question and that they are unlikely to commit any offence if let out on bail.
But Justice Sharma said it has previously been held that such provisions cannot be used to deprive accused persons of their right to a speedy trial or “construed as a tool for indefinite incarceration”.
She also noted that even if the trial in the ED’s case were to proceed, it would not be able to reach its conclusion until the trial in the CBI’s case against Michel ends.
The high court granted regular bail to Michel provided that he furnish a personal bond and surety “in the sum of Rs 5 lakh each” and surrender his passport before the trial court.
In his 60s, Michel has suffered from health issues during his time in Indian custody.
His lawyers have alleged that his deportation to India from the UAE was part of a “prisoner swap” between Abu Dhabi and New Delhi over Dubai princess Sheikha Latifa, whose ship was boarded by Indian commandos and who was subsequently handed over to Emirati soldiers.