New Delhi4 minutes ago
- copy link
The Supreme Court will review its decision on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) today. On July 27, the court, while ruling on 241 petitions challenging the constitutionality of various provisions of the PMLA, had upheld the power of arrest granted to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Act. The court then said that the arrest under money laundering is not arbitrary. Regarding this, MP Karti P Chidambaram had filed a review petition in the court, which will be heard today.
The three-judge bench had given the verdict
On July 27, a bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice CT Ravikumar had delivered the verdict on Vijay Madanlal Chowdhury v/s Union of India case and 240 petitions. In this, Karti Chidambaram, son of former Union Minister P Chidambaram, former Maharashtra government minister Anil Deshmukh, former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti also challenged the ED’s arrest, seizure and investigation process.
What did the Supreme Court say in the decision-
1. The powers of ED to arrest, seize, attach property, raid and take statements have been retained.
2. The Supreme Court said that the complaint ECIR cannot be equated with FIR. This is an internal document of ED.
3. The Supreme Court said that it is not necessary to give the ECIR report to the accused. It is enough to just show the reason during the arrest.
4. Can the amendments made in PMLA in 2018-19 be made under the Finance Act also? This question will be considered by a 7-judge bench under the money bill case.
It was said in the petition – the right of arrest, attachment, seizure is non-constitutional
The petitioners had said that the right to arrest, bail, confiscation or attachment of property under the PMLA is outside the purview of the Criminal Procedure Act. The petitions filed demanded that many provisions of PMLA are unconstitutional, as they do not follow the entire process regarding investigation and trial of cognizable offences, so the ED should follow the CrPC at the time of investigation. Several lawyers, including senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, presented their side in this case.