PMLA Review: Supreme Court Lists Pleas Challenging Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Judgment On March 6

The Supreme Court is set to hear on March 6 the review petitions filed against the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgement, which upheld various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

It may be recalled that a bench of Justices Surya Kant, CT Ravikumar (now retired) and Ujjal Bhuyan was dealing with the matter. However, after the retirement of Justice Ravikumar, a need arose for reconstitution of the bench.

The pleas were first listed on August 7, 2024, but the hearing kept getting adjourned ever since. Now, the matter is shown as listed before a two-judge bench of Justices Kant and N Kotiswar Singh on March 6.

Background

The VMC judgment was delivered on July 27, 2022 by a bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar. Vide this judgment, certain provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) were upheld. These included -

(i) Sections 5, 8(4), 15, 17 and 19 of PMLA, relating to Enforcement Directorate's power of arrest, attachment, search and seizure;

(ii) Section 24 of PMLA, relating to reverse burden of proof (in this regard, the Court said the provision had "reasonable nexus" with the objects of the Act);

(iii) Section 45 of PMLA, which provides "twin-conditions" for bail (in this regard, it was said that the Parliament was competent to amend the provision in 2018 even after the Supreme Court's judgment in Nikesh Tarachand Shah, which struck down the conditions).

Subsequent to this decision, the instant review petitions (8 in number) were filed. With the retirement of Justice Khanwilkar, then CJI NV Ramana presided over the bench to consider the petitions.

While issuing notice on August 25, 2022, CJI Ramana-led bench orally observed that at least two conclusions of the judgment required relook - first, that the copy of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR; equivalent of FIR in money laundering cases) need not be given to the accused, and second, the upholding of the reversal of presumption of innocence.

Thereafter, the Court allowed an application for open court hearing of the review petitions. Since issuance of notice, the petitions were listed for hearing for the first time on August 7. On this date, the matter had to be adjourned at request of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who sought some time to prepare and argue. Subsequently, pursuant to a mentioning, the matter was listed on September 18 but got re-listed for October 16. On the said date, it could not be taken up as Justice Kant was on leave.

Case Title : Karti P Chidambaram v. The Directorate of Enforcement | RP(Crl) 219/2022 (and connected cases)