Latest news with #VijayMadanlalChoudhary
Hindustan Times
01-08-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC to first test maintainability for reopening 2022 PMLA verdict
New Delhi The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will first examine whether the review petitions filed against its 2022 judgment in the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case, which upheld the Enforcement Directorate's sweeping powers under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), are legally maintainable before proceeding to consider the substantive issues raised by the petitioners. The bench posted the matter for hearing on August 6, making it clear that the preliminary objections raised by ED must be addressed first. (ANI PHOTO) A three-judge bench led by Justice Surya Kant emphasised that the scope of a review jurisdiction hinges on certain fixed parameters and therefore, the petitioners demanding a reconsideration of the 2022 judgment must cross the first hurdle of maintainability. 'Since the proposed issues are arising in the review proceedings, we propose to first hear the parties on the issue of maintainability of the review petitions followed by a hearing on the questions proposed to be raised on behalf of the review petitioners. Eventually, the questions that would finally arise for consideration will also be determined by us if we hold that the review petitions are maintainable,' noted the bench, also comprising justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh, hearing a bunch of petitions seeking a complete review of the impugned judgment. The bench posted the matter for hearing on August 6, making it clear that the preliminary objections raised by ED must be addressed first. 'Review has limitations…You will (petitioners) proceed on the premise as if the entire matter has been reopened... but they (ED) are justified in raising preliminary issues… first what we will suggest is you address preliminary issues,' the bench told senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Vikram Chaudhri, leading counsel for the petitioners in the matter. The court's observation came during a brief hearing on the clutch of review petitions filed against the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary ruling, a decision that has since become a constitutional flashpoint for its endorsement of the ED's broad powers related to arrest, search, seizure and the attachment of property. ED, represented by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, argued that the review jurisdiction of the court is narrow and cannot be used as a backdoor to file an appeal. Raising three preliminary objections, the ASG contended that the review petitions must be dismissed unless they clearly demonstrate an 'error apparent on the face of the record' in the 2022 verdict. He read out the three objections framed by the agency -- Whether the review petitions meet the threshold of an 'error apparent on the face of the record; whether the petitions amount to an appeal in disguise and whether the review can be confined only to two issues, as mandated by the court's August 25, 2022 order. By the August 2022 order, the top court had agreed to take a re-look at only two issues -- the supply of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) to the accused and the constitutionality of the reverse burden of proof under Section 24 of the PMLA. The 2022 order issuing notice in the review petition, filed by Congress lawmaker Karti Chidambaram, had noted that these two issues required reconsideration. During the hearing, Sibal contested the ED's claim that the review was limited to two issues, pointing out that no such restriction was recorded in the August 2022 order. He also urged the bench to tag a separate but related batch of cases, where the correctness of the Vijay Madanlal verdict had been raised, with the current review proceedings. That batch had remained dormant following the retirement of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul in December 2023. In this batch of petitions, sections 50 and 63 of the PMLA have been assailed, besides a reconsideration of the entire 2022 judgment. These sections relate to the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) powers to summon witnesses, extract confessions and prosecute for providing false information. Responding, Justice Kant advised Sibal to mention the matter before the Chief Justice of India to seek listing of that batch. The petitioners, in their list of 13 issues submitted to the court, have sought reconsideration of key aspects of its 2022 ruling, arguing that the judgment diluted the offence of money laundering by misreading a pertinent provision, retrospectively applied the law in violation of fundamental rights, and wrongly upheld the ED's powers to compel statements under Section 50, undermining protections against self-incrimination. They have also challenged the court's classification of ED officers as non-police personnel, non-supply of the ECIR to the accused, constitutional validity of the reverse burden of proof for securing bail, which, they claim, strips accused persons of basic due process safeguards.
Indian Express
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Express View on SC's latest rap to ED: It should take heed and reboot
Last week, the Supreme Court stayed the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) probe into money laundering activities at the Tamil Nadu government's liquor distribution agency, TASMAC, and censured the investigative body for acting beyond its remit. The Court expressed concern at the manner in which the ED had made its way into an ongoing Tamil Nadu government investigation. Between 2014 and 2021, the state government filed more than 40 FIRs against officials accused of taking bribes for the allotment of liquor outlets. Then, in March this year, the ED jumped into the fray and raided the retailer's headquarters. The TN government approached the apex court after being denied relief by the Madras High Court. It argued that the criminal acts were committed by individuals, and not the Corporation. The SC's two-judge bench agreed that the central investigative agency had no jurisdiction over the case. It found the ED's intervention 'unnecessary' and in infringement of the federal principle. The SC's rebuke — 'the ED has crossed all limits' — comes at a time when the investigating agency is increasingly inviting accusations of being wielded by the Centre against critics and political opponents. The TASMAC case is not the first time the SC has pulled up the ED for violating red lines and misusing the stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Earlier this month, the Court expressed concern that the agency had made allegations without backing them in 'umpteen number' of money laundering cases. 'This is the pattern — just make allegations without any reference to anything,' the Court said, while hearing the bail plea of an accused in a liquor scam case in Chhattisgarh. A month ago, the Court had called out the agency for paying scant heed to the 'fundamental rights of the accused' in another case in Chhattisgarh. In January, the Court criticised the ED for grilling a former Haryana MLA for nearly 15 hours and 'violating his dignity'. After upholding the contentious provisions of the PMLA in its 2022 verdict in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India, the SC underlined the importance of personal liberty-related safeguards while applying the harsh law and nudged the ED to be more transparent. Last year, the Court cited the agency's low conviction figures — less than 1 per cent in the past 10 years — and asked it to conduct a 'scientific investigation' into its procedures. However, these strictures do not seem to have pushed the ED into mending its ways. Instead, it has, as the Court pointed out in the Chhattisgarh liquor scam case, continued to use 'process as punishment'. The agency's selective targeting of Opposition leaders in the past 10 years has done its reputation no good. In 2022, for instance, an investigation by this paper revealed that more than 95 per cent of political leaders probed by the agency from 2014 came from Opposition ranks. Given that battlelines are being drawn for the Tamil Nadu assembly elections next year, the timing of the ED's action against the state government-run retailer invites sobering questions. It is nobody's case that accountability for corruption should not be fixed. However, scrupulous adherence to due procedures and zero compromise on transparency should be the guiding principles of such operations. The SC's latest reproach should jolt the ED to introspect — and course correct.
