On Wednesday, the Supreme Court has given its verdict on petitions challenging the constitutionality of various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has upheld the power of arrest given to the Enforcement Directorate while delivering the verdict. The Supreme Court has clearly said that arrest under money laundering is not arbitrary of the ED but a constitutional right of the investigating agency.
A bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice CT Ravikumar upheld the validity of the provisions of the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) against which objections were raised.
Let us tell you that the process of arrest, seizure and investigation of ED under PMLA was challenged through 242 petitions across the country.
The petitions were filed by 242 people, including Karti Chidambaram, son of former Union minister P Chidambaram, former Maharashtra minister Anil Deshmukh and former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Mehbooba Mufti.
The Supreme Court has upheld the powers of the ED by hearing these petitions.
Explain that under this PMLA Act, the right to arrest, to grant bail, and to confiscate property is outside the purview of CrPC.
Describing the PMLA Act as unconstitutional in the petitions filed in the Supreme Court, it was said that the procedure given in its CrPC regarding investigation and trial of any cognizable offence is not followed.
But now the Supreme Court has upheld the ED's authority under the PMLA Act.
According to the order, the powers of ED to arrest, to seize, to attach properties, to raid and to take statements have been retained.
The Supreme Court said that the complaint ECIR cannot be equated with FIR. This is an internal document of ED.
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.
