Decoding PMLA

A recent Supreme Court judgement has dealt at length with aspects of the anti-money laundering Act. Here are a few implications

- DINESH KANABAR

THE PREVENTION OF Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) is by far the most far-reaching and feared law dealing with financial proceeds associated with a crime. Ever since its promulgation in 2002, the authorities have sought to invoke PMLA time and again, and so the provisions have come up for interpretation before various courts, including the Supreme Court of India (SC). The PMLA has undergone several amendments to broaden its scope and to address some of the issues arising from court judgements. The power of arrest on a nonbailable basis makes the law a potent weapon in the hands of authorities.

A recent SC judgement in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Others vs. Union of India is a far-reaching one as it deals with the constitutional validity of the Act and its amendments. The judgement deals with a wide range of issues and has invoked sharp reactions from the legal fraternity.

It is not possible for a column to deal with the ramifications of the entirety of the judgement. What I am setting out are some of the important implications that will have a day-to-day relevance to the readers. Also, it is important to note that this judgement does not deal with facts of any specific case but concerns itself with the constitutional validity of the provisions of PMLA and overall interpretation of many of the sections.

Money laundering