Illegal Mining and Money Laundering Case: Delhi HC denies Bail Plea on Medical Grounds [Read Order]

Adopting the Supreme Court’s benchmark in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary, Justice Kathpalia observed that money-laundering is “an aggravated form of crime” requiring stringent bail standards. The judge noted that investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has quantified alleged proceeds of crime at ₹78.14 crore, of which ₹22.81 crore is attributed directly to Tanwar. The court agreed with prosecutors that, given the scale of the purported fraud and Tanwar’s “kingpin” role, there was a substantial risk he could abscond or tamper with evidence if freed.

 Know How to Prepare Estimation and Viability for Project Reports? Know more Click here

Tanwar’s lawyers had sought release citing multiple ailments and an earlier six-week interim bail granted in January for treatment. Fresh medical reports from AIIMS, however, found him “clinically stable” and receiving all prescribed medication inside Tihar Jail. Justice Kathpalia held that PMLA’s proviso for “sick or infirm” accused can be invoked only for life-threatening conditions, which the record did not show.

Tanwar, 46, is an unofficial shareholder of Goverdhan Mines & Minerals (GMM), which investigators say blasted and quarried far beyond its 50-hectare lease, devastating the Aravalli foothills. A National Green Tribunal panel in 2020 exposed the violations; a subsequent Haryana State Pollution Control Board complaint and a police FIR under cheating and forgery provisions became the ED’s “scheduled offences.” Although Parliament in August 2023 removed the Environment (Protection) Act from PMLA’s schedule, the court ruled that the acts were committed while the law still applied and, in any case, parallel IPC offences keep the money-laundering probe alive.

Tanwar was arrested on 30 May 2024 after ED searches allegedly unearthed shell companies, forged share registers and cash trails funnelled into his and family accounts. He has since spent 82 days in custody and more than eight months on interim medical bail, a fact the prosecution said effectively gave him “regular bail by stealth.”

Senior advocate Vikas Pahwa contended that without a surviving “predicate offence” there can be no laundering case, and insisted that Tanwar deserved parity because no other GMM partners have been arrested. The court disagreed, calling Tanwar “the principal beneficiary” and stressing that economic crimes warrant a “different approach” from routine offences.

The ED told the court its investigation is still under way, hinting at possible action against other beneficiaries. With the High Court’s refusal, Tanwar’s only immediate recourse is the Supreme Court. His counsel signalled they are studying the judgment for potential appeal.

Complete practical guide to Drafting Commercial Contracts - CLICK HERE

Bail applications of accused involved in Serious economic offences, even those cloaked in medical pleas will find little sympathy unless the stringent PMLA conditions are convincingly met.

Notably, all the above stated information about the accused are only allegations and not conclusive proof or evidence of his involvement with the offences.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates