The Indian Express Editorial Discussion is a crucial resource for UPSC CSE aspirants, providing in-depth analysis of current affairs, governance, economy, and international relations. It helps candidates develop a nuanced understanding of key issues with factual accuracy and multiple perspectives. Regular engagement with these discussions enhances analytical skills, aiding in answer writing for Mains and interview preparation.
1. Bail, jail and a troubling pattern in PMLA cases
The bail provisions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) have been a subject of intense judicial scrutiny. Section 45 of the PMLA, which imposes stringent conditions for granting bail, has been interpreted differently over time. While the Supreme Court had gradually diluted its strict application, a recent ruling in Union of India v Kanhaiya Prasad (2025) seems to reverse this progress, raising concerns about the future of bail jurisprudence in PMLA cases.
Understanding Section 45 of PMLA
Section 45 of the PMLA prescribes two conditions for granting bail:
(i) The accused must prove their innocence.
(ii) The court must be satisfied that the accused will not commit any offense while on bail.
These conditions place a heavy burden on the accused, making it difficult to secure bail, especially when investigations are ongoing and evidence is primarily with the prosecution. This provision has often been criticized for being at odds with the general bail principles upheld by the Indian judiciary, particularly the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Judicial Interpretations and Evolving Trends
A. Strict Interpretation (Pre-2022)
In Rohit Tandon v The Directorate of Enforcement (2017), the Supreme Court upheld the stringent application of Section 45, emphasizing that general bail principles such as delay in trial and prolonged incarceration were secondary considerations.
B. Gradual Relaxation (2022 Onwards)
(i) The landmark judgment in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary v Union of India (2022) marked a shift in bail jurisprudence under PMLA. While upholding the ED’s broad powers, the court clarified that the twin conditions of Section 45 should be assessed on broad parameters rather than an absolute proof of innocence.
(ii) This decision provided relief to several accused, as seen in cases like Anil Deshmukh (2022), Ramesh Manglani (2023), and Sanjay Jain (2024), where High Courts granted bail citing Vijay Madanlal.
C. Recent Developments: Conflicting Approaches
(i) The Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India v Kanhaiya Prasad (2025) reversed this trend by setting aside bail granted by the Patna High Court, stating that the judge had not explicitly recorded a finding of “not guilty.” This decision could discourage High Courts from exercising discretion in granting bail.
(ii) However, in Udhaw Singh v The Directorate of Enforcement, the Supreme Court granted bail on grounds of trial delay and incarceration period, in line with the principles established in Manish Sisodia v The Directorate of Enforcement (2024) and V Senthil Balaji v The Directorate of Enforcement (2024).
Right to Speedy Trial and Prolonged Incarceration
The Supreme Court has increasingly recognized prolonged incarceration without trial as a valid ground for bail. In Manish Sisodia (2024), it emphasized that Article 21 encompasses the right to a speedy trial, making indefinite pre-trial detention unjustified. This principle was reaffirmed in cases like Prem Prakash v Union of India (2024) and Ramkripal Meena v The Directorate of Enforcement (2024).
Conclusion
The conflicting interpretations of Section 45 in recent cases highlight an ongoing struggle between strict statutory conditions and constitutional safeguards. While the decision in Kanhaiya Prasad raises concerns, it is hoped that it remains limited to its specific facts rather than becoming a general precedent. The judiciary must ensure a balanced approach where the need to prevent money laundering does not override fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial and liberty.
2. The strategic race India can’t lose
The global race for critical minerals—such as lithium, cobalt, graphite, and rare earth elements—is becoming as significant as the past century’s geopolitical struggles over oil. These minerals are essential for future technologies, including electric vehicles, renewable energy, and advanced semiconductors. As major powers like the US and China compete for control over these resources, India must take decisive action to secure its strategic interests.
Global Dynamics and Critical Minerals
Historically, energy resources like oil have played a decisive role in global conflicts and economic strategies. The US, once dependent on oil imports, became the world’s largest producer to reduce its strategic vulnerabilities. Similarly, Russia’s ability to sustain prolonged conflicts is backed by its energy independence.
Today, critical minerals are emerging as the new oil, influencing global power dynamics. The US faces significant dependence on imports, particularly from China, which controls a major share of rare earth elements. This dependency has driven US efforts to secure mineral resources, evident in former President Donald Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland and the ongoing geopolitical significance of Ukraine, which possesses vast lithium and graphite reserves.
Implications for India
India, aspiring to become a global manufacturing hub, is heavily reliant on imports for critical minerals. While the government is securing overseas assets and supply agreements, domestic production remains insufficient. Unlike oil, which can be imported, a nation without access to critical minerals risks falling behind in future technologies.
To address this challenge, India must:
(i) Expand Domestic Exploration: India has rich geological potential but lacks sufficient exploration. Liberalizing the sector and incentivizing private investment will enhance domestic production.
(ii) Reduce Import Dependence: Relying on foreign supplies exposes India to geopolitical risks. Domestic production will ensure long-term strategic security.
(iii) Strengthen Global Alliances: Partnering with friendly nations for resource security, as seen in recent supply agreements, will mitigate risks.
Conclusion
As the world transitions to a technology-driven economy, India cannot afford to lag in securing critical minerals. Just as oil dictated global power dynamics in the past, these minerals will define future economic and strategic influence. By prioritizing domestic exploration and securing reliable supply chains, India can position itself as a strong player in the global technological race.
Disclaimer:
This analysis is based on the editorial content published in Indian Express and is intended solely for informational and educational purposes. The views, opinions, and interpretations expressed herein are those of the author of original article. Readers are encouraged to refer to the original article for complete context and to exercise their own judgment while interpreting the analysis. The analysis does not constitute professional advice or endorsement of any political, economic, or social perspective.
Follow Fusion IAS