loader image

Bombay HC Grants Medical Bail to PMLA Accused, Holds Morbid Obesity Can Bring Accused Within ‘Sick or Infirm’ Exception

Bombay HC Grants Medical Bail to PMLA Accused, Holds Morbid Obesity Can Bring Accused Within ‘Sick or Infirm’ Exception

Ushik Mahesh Gala v. Directorate of Enforcement, Decided on 24.08.2026

Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has granted medical bail to an accused in a money-laundering case, holding that his morbid obesity, multiple surgeries and continuing post-operative complications brought him within the sick or infirm exception under the proviso to Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Justice Milind N. Jadhav noted that the accused had undergone three surgeries, including gall bladder removal and abdominal hernia repair, and remained under post-operative rehabilitation. The Court found that his medical records reflected serious health conditions requiring continued rehabilitation, monitoring and care.

Also Read Bombay HC Restrains Former Kidzee Franchisee From Using ‘Kidzee’, ‘Kidgee’; Holds Contractual Trademark Dispute Can Be Referred To Arbitration

The Court rejected the Enforcement Directorate’s submission that his condition could be adequately managed in prison or at a government medical facility. Referring to judicial precedents, the Court observed that obesity can constitute a disease and may be the root cause of several other ailments.

The Court held that once an accused falls within the sick and infirm exception under Section 45(1) PMLA, the twin conditions ordinarily required for grant of bail under the provision need not be satisfied.

Considering the accused’s medical condition and the risk of deterioration if he were returned to prison, the Court granted him medical bail subject to conditions, including execution of a Rs. 2 lakh personal bond with surety, periodic medical examination, cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on travel and contact with witnesses or co-accused.

Appearances

For the Applicant: Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rishi Bhuta, Advocate, Mr. Rashmin Khandekar, Mr. Pushkraj Deshpande, Mr. Rohan Marathe and Ms. Bhumika Khandelwal, instructed by ALMT Legal.

For Respondent No. 1: Mr. Pavan Patil with Mr. Shubham Saraf, Mr. Tanmay Deshmukh and Mr. Soham Badole, Advocates.

For Respondent No. 2–State: Ms. Gauri S. Rao, APP.

PDF Icon

Ushik Mahesh Gala v. Directorate of Enforcement

Preview PDF