SC On Rights of Accused Under PMLA from Vajirao & Reddy Institute

SC ON RIGHTS OF ACCUSED UNDER PMLA

• Case: Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023)
• Issue: Whether the Enforcement Directorate (ED) must provide written grounds for arrest under Section 19 of the PMLA.
• Ruling: The Court ruled that the accused must be informed of the grounds for arrest in writing, as mandated by Article 22 of the Constitution. Oral communication is insufficient; written grounds are essential to validate the arrest.

• Case: Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar v. Directorate of Enforcement (May 16, 2024)
• Issue: Applicability of Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to PMLA cases.
• Ruling: The Court upheld the application of Section 436A, which entitles undertrials to bail if they have been detained for half the maximum period of imprisonment for the offense. This provision has been replaced by Section 479 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, affecting PMLA cases.
  • But if the convict has been arrested for more than one offence, then this section will not be applicable.

• Case: Interim bail granted to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal (July 12, 2024)
• Issue: Legality of arrest without establishing the “necessity” under Section 19 of the PMLA.
• Ruling: The Court emphasized that the ED must have a high threshold of evidence to justify the arrest. It referred the issue of “need and necessity to arrest” to a five-judge bench for further deliberation.

• Case: Bail granted to former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia (August 9, 2024)
• Issue: Relaxation of stringent “twin conditions” for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA.
• Ruling: The Court allowed relaxation of the twin conditions (burden of proof and likelihood of re-offending) due to Sisodia’s prolonged incarceration (17 months) without trial.

• Case: Bail granted to BRS leader K Kavitha (August 27, 2024)
• Issue: Application of bail exception under Section 45 for women accused under the PMLA.
• Ruling: The Court overruled the Delhi High Court’s denial of bail to Kavitha, emphasizing that the exception should not be denied based on educational status. The bench found the lower court’s reasoning flawed and affirmed Kavitha's right to bail.

• Case: Prem Prakash v. Union of India (2024)
• Issue: Admissibility of confessions made to ED officers under Section 50 of the PMLA.
• Ruling: The Court held that confessions made to ED officers do not violate the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. However, confessions obtained through coercive methods are deemed invalid. The ruling highlights the importance of voluntariness in confessions.

• Rights of the Accused: The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the importance of procedural safeguards for accused individuals under the PMLA. The rulings emphasize that legal protections must be upheld to ensure fairness in the judicial process.
• Impact of Rulings: These decisions reflect a balance between stringent anti-money laundering measures and constitutional rights. They provide significant precedents for future cases and guide lower courts and authorities in implementing PMLA provisions.