A Special Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on Thursday decided to not continue hearing petitions challenging amendments made to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The sudden twist in events came at the end of the second consecutive day of hearing.
The decision to dissolve the Bench was prompted by the fact that Justice Kaul was retiring on December 25 and the case required detailed hearing and there would not be enough time for drafting a judgment.
Justice Kaul said the decision to withdraw from the case was made with a “heavy heart” and he had very few days left on the Bench. The case has been scheduled after two months to be heard by an appropriate Bench of the court. The Chief Justice of India would constitute the new Bench.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who is part of the three-judge Bench with Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Kaul, said the case raised complex questions which need to be gone into thoroughly. One of them was whether a mere invocation of conspiracy (Section 120B of the India Penal Code) would bring an alleged crime under PMLA even if the substantial offence was not part of the schedule of offences under the 2002 Act.
Justice Khanna asked whether the mere registration of the Enforcement Case Investigation Report (ECIR) would make a person an accused.
Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, for the petitioners, said the case goes right into the heart of the question of liberty.
The Special Bench was hearing a series of petitions which have questioned the correctness of the apex court’s judgment on July 27, 2022 in the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case.
The judgment, delivered by a Coordinate Bench of three judges led by Justice (now retired) A.M. Khanwilkar last year, had upheld core amendments to the PMLA which gave extensive powers to the Enforcement Directorate and shifted the burden of proof of innocence onto the accused rather than the prosecution. The judgment had hailed the PMLA as the law brought to end the “scourge of money laundering”.
However, discontent over the July 2022 judgment had translated into more writ petitions being filed in the apex court. They challenged the impact of the PMLA on personal liberty, procedures of law and the constitutional mandate. Review petitions were also filed against the judgment.
