The Supreme Court will hear a review petition challenging its judgement upholding various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on August 5. This decision comes after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested an adjournment due to the unavailability of Additional Solicitor General SV Raju. Consequently, the hearing, originally scheduled for an earlier date, has been postponed.
The review petition seeks to challenge the Supreme Court's previous ruling, which upheld the provisions of the PMLA. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta has opposed the reconsideration, arguing that the PMLA is not a standalone offence and is aligned with the directives of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).
Earlier, the Supreme Court acknowledged that two issues related to the PMLA provisions need further consideration. The court emphasised its support for preventing black money and money laundering but recognized the necessity of revisiting certain aspects of the law. During previous hearings, the court highlighted the seriousness of money laundering offences, stressing the country's inability to tolerate such crimes.
The review petition was initially agreed upon for a hearing in an open court, with Congress MP Karti Chidambaram being one of the petitioners. On July 27, 2022, the Supreme Court had upheld the validity of various PMLA provisions, granting the Enforcement Directorate (ED) the authority to make arrests, conduct searches and seizures, and attach proceeds of crime.
The court also stated that an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) is not equivalent to a First Information Report (FIR) and that ED officers are not considered police officers.
The petitions challenging the PMLA provisions raised several issues, including the absence of a procedure to initiate investigations and summons while the accused remains unaware of the contents of the ECIR. Section 45 of the PMLA deals with cognizable and non-bailable offences, while Section 50 empowers ED officers to summon individuals to provide evidence or produce records.
Non-compliance with these summonses can lead to penalties under the PMLA. The Centre has defended the constitutional validity of the PMLA provisions, asserting that around 4,700 cases are currently under investigation by the Directorate of Enforcement.
The Centre argues that the PMLA is not a conventional penal statute but rather aims to prevent money laundering, regulate related activities, confiscate proceeds of crime, and ensure that offenders are punished by a competent court.
India, as a signatory to international treaties and a significant participant in the global fight against money laundering, is obligated to adopt global best practices and respond to evolving challenges.
The Centre emphasises that the PMLA and its provisions are crucial components of this international effort to combat money laundering and uphold financial integrity.
The upcoming hearing on August 5 will determine whether the Supreme Court will reconsider its previous judgement and address the issues raised in the review petition. This case highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the PMLA and its implications for India's legal and financial systems.
Follow us
