Ernakulam, Nov 20 - A quiet courtroom suddenly turned tense on Thursday afternoon as the Kerala High Court dismissed a pre-arrest bail plea filed by Kollam-based cashew dealer Aneesh Babu. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has accused him of laundering crores collected from individuals who believed he would import cashew shipments from Tanzania. The hearing, though brief, drew unusual attention from lawyers familiar with economic offences.
Background
According to the ED, five criminal cases registered across Kollam between 2018 and 2020 triggered the money-laundering probe. Police complaints alleged that Aneesh and associates promised cashew deliveries, job opportunities abroad, or business partnerships, but never fulfilled them. Instead, victims reportedly transferred huge sums - together totalling ₹25.52 crore - expecting legitimate trade.
Read also: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Agra Man After Nearly Three Years in Jail, Flags Long Delay in Hearing
One police case also mentions 50 metric tonnes of imported cashew nuts for which no payment was made and cheques allegedly bounced later. A few complainants said they were convinced by forged documents and smooth assurances.
Aneesh’s counsel insisted he was being targeted unfairly. The defence argued the ED case emerged only after the applicant filed a complaint against an agency official, calling the present proceedings “a retaliatory move”. The lawyer even said, “Even if the allegations are taken at face value, they don’t make a money-laundering offence.”
Read also: Urgent Mentions Only Through Written Slips Except in 'Extraordinary' Cases, CJI Surya Kant Clarifies
Court’s Observations
Justice Kauser Edappagath did not appear persuaded. The bench repeatedly referred to Section 45 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act - the section that sets two strict pre-conditions for bail. Unless the court believes the accused is likely innocent and will not reoffend while out on bail, release cannot be granted.
The judge reminded both sides that the Supreme Court has already upheld these “twin conditions”, even for anticipatory bail. At one point, the bench observed, “This Court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty. At this stage, such satisfaction is not possible.”
Case records, bank statements and investigation findings reportedly show that around ₹2.03 crore landed directly in Aneesh’s account. ED officials allege the money was never used for import, as claimed. The court described the allegations as part of a larger financial pattern rather than a one-off grievance.
Read also: Himachal Pradesh High Court Flags Flaws in Opium Recovery, Grants Bail to Nepali Woman After
Investigators also told the court that although the accused responded to summons occasionally, he has not been “fully cooperating”. The agency argued custodial questioning is needed to identify the fund trail and other potential beneficiaries. The judge seemed to agree, noting that the probe is “at a crucial stage”.
Economic offences, the court said, often harm public trust and cannot be treated casually. “The magnitude of the offence is too high,” the ASG submitted, urging caution.
Decision
After nearly 30 minutes of arguments, the judge leaned back, paused, and delivered the order - the bail plea was dismissed. The court concluded that releasing the applicant could interfere with ongoing investigation and potentially influence witnesses. With that, the matter ended, leaving the ED free to proceed with custodial questioning if necessary.
Case Title: Aneesh Babu vs Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Case Number: Bail Application No. 13987 of 2025
Case Type: Pre-arrest bail application under PMLA/BNSS
Decision Date: 20 November 2025