oppn parties PMLA: Supreme Court Allows Draconian Powers To ED

News Snippets

  • Maharashtra cabinet is likely to bee expanded today with the Shiv Sena and the BJP equally sharing the new berths
  • Kapil Sibal says there is 'no hope left' in Supreme Court, slammed by law minister Kiren Rijiju
  • Centre tells Rajya Sabha that Bengal got zero MGNREGS payout this fiscal for not complying with Central directives
  • Monsoon session of Parliament ends 4 days early
  • Chess Olympiad: India A, comprising Tania Sachdev, Koneru Humoy and Bhakti, among others, look set to win gold
  • CWG: India's best ever perrformance with 22 golds, 16 silvers and 23 bronze medals and 4th position on the table
  • CWG: Sharath Kamal wins gold in men's singles in table tennis
  • CWG: Satwik-Chirag win gold in men's doubles in badminton
  • CWG: PV Sindhu wins gold in women's singles in badminton
  • CWG: Lakshya Sen wins gold in men's singles in badminton
  • Mamata Banerjee says states should not be forced to implement the NEP
  • PM Modi asks states to raise farm output
  • Differences between JD(U) and BJP in Bihar came to fore again as JD(U) chief Lalan Singh accused the BJP of repeating the Chirag Paswan model with RCP Singh
  • CWG: Lakhsya Sen and PV Sindhu enter finals in badminton while Sharath Kamal enters TT finals
  • CWG: Indian women lose to Australia by 9 runs in cricket to settle for silver
Nitish Kumar resigns as Bihar chief minister, breaks alliance with the BJP /////// Most likely will form the government in alliance with RJD, Congress and Left parties
oppn parties
PMLA: Supreme Court Allows Draconian Powers To ED

By Our Editorial Team
First publised on 2022-07-29 08:38:50

About the Author

Sunil Garodia The India Commentary view

The Supreme Court verdict on the PMLA can be seen as a licence to the executive to bypass rule of law and due process to do whatever it pleases by using the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to move against citizens suspected of indulging in money laundering. By upholding the constitutional validity of all the stringent provisions of PMLA (in contrast to the 2017 verdict which had found the restrictive bail conditions in PMLA to be unconstitutional), the court has put the stamp of approval on a law that is full of arbitrary powers granted to officials of investigating agencies and which presumes guilt over innocence, even before it is proved, and puts the onus on the charged party to prove his or her innocence.

The reason the court gave to find the provisions of the PMLA constitutionally valid - that money laundering is no less heinous than terrorism as it can cause havoc in the economy and can lead to other, more serious crimes like terror funding through the proceeds of crime - although valid cannot be the so overpowering as to ignore rule of law and due process and leave the citizen at the mercy of the government. The courts have the right and the duty to protect the rights of the individual by putting reasonable restrictions on the sweeping powers given to prosecutors under the PMLA and other such draconian laws.

But the present verdict allows ED to arrest citizens without supplying them with the ECIR and by just stating the reason of arrest, makes the bail condition so restrictive that the accused must prove his innocence to get bail and allows the statements made before ED officials to be used as evidence in a court of law. This means that a person arrested by the agency under PMLA has no recourse and must wait for the ED to fail to prove his or her guilt before he or she can hope to be free. This goes against all principles of law.