Delhi High Court on Tuesday granted bail to Christian Michel James, the alleged middleman in the ₹3,600-crore AgustaWestland money-laundering case, saying his prolonged incarceration without any foreseeable conclusion of trial would infringe on his fundamental right to a speedy trial.

James has spent more than six years in Tihar Jail.

The Supreme Court had on February 18 granted bail to the British national in a related case being probed by the CBI.

James’s lawyers said they would move the trial court on Wednesday for further formalities relating to his bail conditions.

James was extradited to India from the UAE in December 2018 and was subsequently arrested by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate in two separate cases relating to the AgustaWestland scam.

While granting bail to James, the high court considered his prolonged incarceration and the fact that he had also been granted bail by the Supreme Court in the corruption case pertaining to a predicate offence. The court also noted that charges had not been framed in the case yet.

“Such prolonged incarceration, without any foreseeable conclusion of trial, would infringe upon the applicant’s fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.

He said James had already spent over six years and two months in custody but the trial had not even started.

James, who was represented by advocates Aljo K. Joseph, Vishnu Shankar and Sriram P, argued that the maximum sentence prescribed under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, was seven years and he had nearly served this period without any conviction.

The defence counsel also argued that the continued detention of the accused without trial amounted to pre-trial punishment, violating his fundamental right to a fair and expeditious trial.

Citing the Supreme Court rulings, the high court said that the stringent bail conditions imposed by Section 45 of the PMLA could not be used to indefinitely detain an accused in judicial custody.

“As noted above, the Supreme Court, in multiple decisions, has held that the right to bail must be read into such provisions where there is an inordinate delay in the completion of trial which effectively converts pre-trial custody into a punitive sentence,” the high court said.

James was directed by the high court to furnish a personal bond and surety of ₹5,00,000 each and surrender his passport before the trial court.

The high court also allowed the ED to request the trial court to impose necessary conditions before releasing the applicant on bail. The court made it clear that James must cooperate with the investigation and the trial.

An open-ended non-bailable warrant was issued against James by a Delhi court on October 23, 2015, after the ED submitted that his questioning was needed to ascertain key aspects of the case.

The ED chargesheet filed against James in June 2016 alleged that he had received 42 million euros from Italian chopper design and manufacturing company AgustaWestland and distributed kickbacks to influence the contract. The ED alleged that James had facilitated bribes to Indian officials to secure a deal for the supply of 12 helicopters from AgustaWestland. The agency further alleged that he had laundered proceeds of the crime by routing illicit funds through shell companies.

The ED had opposed James’s bail on the grounds that he was a flight risk, had evaded investigation at every stage and did not voluntarily cooperate with the authorities.

The Supreme Court granted bail to James in the corruption case being probed by the CBI, which had claimed an estimated loss of 398.21 million euros to the exchequer due to the chopper deal.