PMLA Verdict: This article delves into the key aspects of the 2022 SC ruling, the implications of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), and the ongoing debate about ECIR vs. FIR.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has decided to revisit its 2022 judgment on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the powers of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under it, despite strong objections from the government and ED. Here we delve into the key aspects of the 2022 SC ruling, the implications of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), and the ongoing debate about ECIR vs. FIR.
The 2022 SC Ruling
In July 2022, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of stringent provisions of the PMLA, particularly Section 19, which deals with the power to arrest. The court emphasized that this section does not suffer from arbitrariness, asserting the importance of these provisions in combating money laundering and its potential threats to the country’s economic stability and sovereignty. Additionally, Section 5 of the Act related to property attachment was deemed constitutionally valid.
Understanding PMLA & CrPC Sections
While Section 45 of the PMLA pertains to cognizable and non-bailable offences, Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) deals with the maximum detention period for undertrial prisoners.
ECIR vs. FIR
The Enforcement Directorate registers an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) in India, which bears similarities with a First Information Report (FIR) in criminal cases. However, significant differences exist, including its limited sharing, lack of procedural requirements for magistrate presentation, and no monitoring of investigation by the magistrate.
SC’s Perspective On ECIR
The Supreme Court clarified in its 2022 ruling that ECIR is an internal document of the ED, and it need not be shared with the accused. Furthermore, it is not mandatory to produce an ECIR before the magistrate. The court stated that the ED’s disclosure of grounds at the time of arrest is sufficient, addressing concerns about the violation of constitutional rights.
Article 20(3) & Section 50
The court also clarified that ED officials are not police officers, and statements recorded by them under Section 50 of the Act do not infringe Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which protects against self-incrimination. The procedure under Section 50 is characterized as an inquiry, not an investigation.
Validating Sections Of PMLA
The Supreme Court affirmed the validity of various sections of the PMLA, including those related to definitions, property attachment, search and seizure, powers of arrest, reverse burden of proof, offenses triable by special courts, and bail conditions. It noted that Parliament was competent to amend these conditions, even after the court’s earlier declaration of their unconstitutionality.
Friction Points
A clear interpretation is important as some argue that the voluntary provision of ECIR is arbitrary and discriminatory. However, the top court has asserted that informing the arrested person about the grounds of arrest satisfies constitutional mandates. The court also noted that ECIR may contain sensitive information that could impact the inquiry/investigation outcome.
Future Considerations
The Supreme Court left the question of amendments to the PMLA enacted through a Finance Act for examination before a larger seven-judge bench. Special courts can review relevant records when arrested individuals are produced before them, thus determining the need for continued detention in money laundering cases.
The Supreme Court’s decision to revisit the 2022 PMLA ruling and the ongoing debate about ECIR vs. FIR has significant implications for the legal landscape in India, particularly in the context of combating money laundering and financial crimes.
Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter & Pinterest and Instagram and Keep visiting us for Latest News Online.
CREDIT: ZEE NEWS
