Latest news with #A.M.Khanwilkar
Hans India
28-05-2025
- Business
- Hans India
SEBI's former chief Madhabi Puri Buch gets relief in Hindenburg allegations case
New Delhi: In relief for former SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch, the Lokpal has quashed complaints of conflict of interest and inappropriate financial gain against her based on a report by the now-defunct Hindenburg Research. The Lokpal, headed by former Supreme Court judge, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar (retd), held that there was no prima facie proof to substantiate the allegations. The anti-corruption watchdog termed the allegations against her baseless, unproven, and not supported by credible evidence. Following the allegations that surfaced in August 2024, then Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Chairperson Buch and her husband Dhaval Buch had strongly denied the charges, calling it a "character assassination attempt' because an Enforcement action and a show cause notice was issued to the Nate Anderson-led company the previous month. According to the joint statement issued by the couple, "In the context of allegations made in the Hindenburg Report dated August 10, 2024, against us, we would like to state that we strongly deny the baseless allegations and insinuations made in the report". "The same are devoid of any truth. Our life and finances are an open book. All disclosures as required have already been furnished to SEBI over the years. We have no hesitation in disclosing any and all financial documents, including those that relate to the period when we were strictly private citizens, to any and every authority that may seek them," read the joint statement. "It is unfortunate that Hindenburg Research against whom SEBI has taken an Enforcement action and issued a show cause notice has chosen to attempt character assassination in response to the same".
The Hindu
07-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Supreme Court seeks issues for consideration in review of 2022 PMLA ruling, final hearing on August 6-7
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (May 7, 2025) gave petitioners seeking a review of a nearly three-year-old top court judgment, which confirmed amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 (PMLA) giving extensive powers of arrest, summon and raid to the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), liberty to propose issues in consultation with the Centre's top law officers, who raised objections. Also read: Supreme Court reconstitutes three-judge Bench to hear on ED's powers Appearing before a three-judge Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre, said the review must be limited to only two aspects of the July 27, 2022, judgment. Mr. Mehta said the Supreme Court itself had, while issuing formal notice to the Centre on August 25, 2022, in the review, restricted the ambit of the review to the dual aspects of depriving accused a copy of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) and transferral of the burden of proof of innocence onto shoulders of the accused instead of the prosecution. He said the Justice Kant Bench should limit the review to only these two issues. The Centre had also filed an affidavit the very next day confirming this arrangement. The petitioners had not objected to the affidavit. However, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for the petitioners including Karti Chidambaram, informed the Bench that a coordinate Bench of the court headed by Justice AS Oka has, in the meanwhile, pronounced a judgment that ECIR copies must be shared with the accused. Also read: SC ruling paves way for ED to attach assets, conduct raids prior to predicate offence: Ex ED chief The July 2022 verdict giving the ED unbridled powers under the PMLA had been delivered by a three-judge Bench headed by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar (now retired). Mr. Sibal said the review, in the light of Justice Oka's conflicting judgment must go to a Constitution Bench for an authoritative pronouncement. Justice Kant remarked that Mr. Sibal's submissions suggested a complete recall of the 2022 judgment. The Bench asked him to instead to broadly suggest issues in consultation with Mr. Mehta and Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju and place it before the court first for its consideration. The court fixed the case for firming up the issues on July 16 at 2 p.m. It then scheduled the case for final hearing of arguments on August 6, and if necessary, on August 7. The review petitioners have alleged that the top court's 2022 judgment deprived an accused person basic rights, which include even a copy of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR). The core amendments to which the judgment gave its stamp of approval had virtually transferred the burden of proof of innocence onto the shoulders of the accused instead of the prosecution. The 545-page judgment, authored by Justice (now retired) A.M. Khanwilkar, had upheld the PMLA's controversial 'twin conditions' for bail. These conditions provided that a PMLA-designated trial court was required to give bail only if the accused could prove his innocence against money laundering charges. On the slim chance the accused did get bail, he had to establish that he was 'not likely to commit any offence while on bail'. For an undertrial, who is under incarceration and with whom the ED has not shared the Enforcement Case Information Report, to prove that he is not guilty, to say the least, may prove to be a herculean if not an impossible task, the review petitions had argued. The 2022 verdict was based on an elaborate challenge raised against the amendments introduced to the 2002 Act by way of a Finance Act in 2019. Over 240 petitions were filed against the amendments which the challengers claimed to violate personal liberty, procedures of law and the constitutional mandate. The petitioners had claimed that the 'process itself was the punishment' under the PMLA.
