popups

PMLA a 'Be-lagaam Ghoda', there is no restraint: Kapil Sibal argues before Supreme Court

Read Time: 05 minutes

When the top court questioned Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal on how many judicial hours had been invested in the case involving the challenge to various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, (PMLA) Sibal replied saying,

"This is a 'be-lagaam ghoda' (unbridled horse), there is no restraint...This case should thus be dealt with as soon as possible."

On a lighter note, Sibal added that this case was a lawyers' paradise as well as a bureaucrats' paradise.

Earlier, while making his submissions before a 3-Judge bench, Sibal told the Court that one central feature of any investigation which is oversight by the judiciary, was missing under PMLA.

He added that unless Section 154 or 157 of the CrPC is applied to the PMLA, this element would continue to remain missing.

Sibal further argued that Section 50(1) of the PMLA had been misinterpreted by all the authorities. Referring to Section 50(2) PMLA, he added that when the ED is investigating, it can call any of the agencies to submit an affidavit which states who all are involved in a particular matter.

"This provision has nothing to do with the accused, an accused cannot be called under this provision", he added.

A bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari, and CT Ravikumar was thus told that calling an accused, taking his statement and convicting him is outside the purview of Section 50.

The Court then questioned Sibal if anything collated under Section 50 can be used before a court of law.

To this Sibal said that all such material would be hit by Articles 21, 20(3) of the Constitution and Section 25 of the Evidence Act.

Sibal further argued that an investigation cannot be a judicial proceeding, and thus, evidence collected under Section 50 was not for the purpose of a trial.

Furthemore, it was argued that there being a right against self-incrimination, interpreting S. 50 in any other way will be violative of Article 20(3).

"The right to silence is given to an accused and if there is a provision under PMLA which says you have to tell the truth, then that is violative of Article 21...", said Sibal.

Recently, Sibal had told the Supreme Court that money laundering cannot be a standalone offence, however, the amendment in the Finance Act has made it a standalone one.

This submission was made while arguing in a plea pertaining to issues ranging from the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) powers for taking on investigations, issuance of summons, carrying out arrests, etc., and the constitutional validity of the PMLA.

Cause Title: Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary and Ors. vs Union of India & Other

Also Read