Introduction
The Supreme Court of India has constituted a new bench to hear review petitions against its July 2022 ruling in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v Union of India. This ruling had affirmed the constitutional validity of the extensive powers granted to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).
Composition of the New Bench
The newly formed bench will consist of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. The decision to reconstitute the bench was made to accommodate the current assignments of the justices, as CJI Surya Kant explained that listing the matter before the original bench would disrupt three existing benches.
Background of the Case
The review petitions challenge the decision made in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, which upheld the PMLA’s validity after a three-judge bench heard a batch of 241 petitions. This July 2022 ruling overturned the November 2017 decision in Nikesh Tarachand Shah v. Union of India by Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Rohinton Nariman, which had invalidated certain stringent bail conditions under Section 45(1) of the PMLA.
Key Provisions Upheld
The Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment sustained the validity of several critical provisions of the PMLA, including Section 3 (definition of money laundering), Section 19 (powers of arrest), Section 24 (reverse burden of proof), and Section 45 (offences being cognizable and non-bailable with twin conditions for bail). Additionally, the court determined that the supply of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) to the accused is not mandatory, reinforcing its status as an internal document, unlike a First Information Report (FIR).
Controversy and Criticism
The 2022 judgment received significant criticism, prompting numerous review petitions. Petitioners have contested the constitutionality of the PMLA, particularly concerning the reverse burden clause, denial of procedural safeguards like the provision of the ECIR, and the stringent bail conditions under Section 45.
More Read
Objections by the Enforcement Directorate
The Enforcement Directorate raised three primary objections to the review petitions. These included whether the petitions demonstrate an “error apparent on the face of the record,” if the petitions are, in essence, appeals in disguise, and whether the review should only address the supply of the ECIR and the constitutional validity of the reverse burden of proof under Section 24, as per the August 2022 order.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the review petitions with the new bench underscores the urgency and significance of the matter. The court will soon set a date for the hearings, with CJI Surya Kant leading the proceedings.
