Read Time: 03 minutes
In the judgment, it was also held that the supply of Enforcement Case Information Report under PMLA proceedings is not mandatory since ECIR is an internal document and cannot be equated to FIRs.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a review petition filed challenging its judgment upholding the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
After the plea was mentioned today before the Chief Justice of India led bench, Court agreed to list the matter.
A Justice AM Khanwilkar led bench of the top court on July 27 this year upheld the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The bench, also consisting of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar however held that the challenge to the passage of amendments to the Act in 2019 as a money bill will be considered by a larger bench.
Over 200 petitions were filed challenging the provisions of the Act. It was argued before the court that the powers of the Enforcement Directorate to arrest, force confessions, and seize property were unbridled.
In its judgment, the Top court upheld the constitutional validity of —
Section 3 which provides for definition of money laundering;
Section 5 which pertains to attachment of property;
Section 8(4) which provides powers to the authority to take possession of attached property;
Section 17 which provides for search and seizure and Section 45 which provides for offences being cognizable and non-bailable
In its 545-page judgment, Court also answered the 12 questions of law formulated in the batch of petitions. A comprehensive look at the same can be found here.
Please Login or Register
