SC to hear review petition challenging judgment upholding PMLA provisions on August 5

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed a bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna that Additional Solicitor General SV Raju is in personal difficulty in Ahmedabad. He sought to adjourn the matter for two weeks.

Thereafter, the court adjourned the matter for a hearing on August 5.

The court was hearing a review petition challenging the top court's judgement upholding the provision of PMLA.

Earlier, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the reevaluation of the judgment and said the PMLA is not a standalone offence and PMLA is prepared by the legislature in conformity with the directions issued by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)

Earlier, the top court agreed to reconsider the review petition, saying that prima facie two issues relating to provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act need to be reconsidered.

During the last hearing, the court also noted that there are some issues that need re-look but it said that the bench is completely in support of prevention of black money or money laundering.

The court had also said that the offense of money laundering is serious and that the country cannot afford such an offence.

The court had earlier agreed to hear in an open court the review petition against the judgement pertaining to upholding various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

One of the review pleas was filed by Congress MP Karti Chidambaram.

On July 27, 2022, the Supreme Court upheld validity of various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which empowers ED to make arrests, conduct searches and seizures and attach proceeds of crime.

The court also held that an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) cannot be equated with a First Information Report (FIR) and ED officers are not police officers.

The court was hearing various pleas challenging the various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

On March 15, 2022, the top court reserved its order on a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Prominent names like Karti Chidambaram and former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti were among the petitioners in the case.

Their petitions raised multiple issues, including the absence of a procedure to commence investigation and summoning, while the accused was not made aware of the contents of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR).

Section 45 deals with offences that are cognizable and non-bailable Section 50 of the PMLA empowers the 'authority' i.e. officers of the Enforcement Directorate, to summon any person to give evidence or produce records. All persons summoned are bound to answer questions put to them and to produce the documents as required by the ED officers, failing which they can be penalised under the PMLA.

However, the Centre had justified the constitutional validity of the provisions of PMLA.

The Centre has apprised the court that around 4,700 cases are being investigated by the Directorate of Enforcement.

Centre said that PMLA is not a conventional penal statute but is a statute which is aimed at necessarily preventing money laundering, regulating certain activities relatable to money laundering, confiscating the "proceeds of crime" and the property derived therefrom and also requires offenders to be punished by the competent court after filing a complaint.

Centre submitted that India and its version of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, are merely cogs in this international vehicle. Centre submitted that India, as a signatory to the treaties and an important participant in the international process and the fight against money laundering, (the country) is bound legally and morally, to adopt global best practices and respond to the changing needs of the times. (ANI)