Only 40 convictions from 5,000 PMLA cases: SC demands better prosecution
On August 7, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of low conviction rates in money laundering cases, emphasizing the need for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to improve the quality of its prosecutions. The remarks came during the hearing of a bail petition for Sunil Kumar Agarwal, a businessman from Chhattisgarh charged with money laundering related to coal transportation.
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted the concerning statistics, referring to comments made in Parliament about the dismal conviction rate under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). According to Union Minister of State for Home Nityanand Rai, only 40 convictions have been secured out of over 5,000 cases registered in the past decade. Justice Surya Kant discussed the impact of poor prosecution quality, stressing the need for solid evidence and proper prosecution to establish cases in court. He criticized the reliance on oral statements and affidavits, suggesting that scientific investigation would yield more reliable results. In response, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju argued that statements made under Section 50 of the PMLA are considered evidence, unlike those under Section 161 of the CrPC, which are not admissible in court.
Justice Dipankar Datta, who recently participated in the judgment concerning Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, reminded that Section 19 of the PMLA requires arresting officers to provide reasons to believe in the accused's guilt. He questioned whether this requirement was met in Agarwal's case. ASG Raju's emphasis on Section 45 of the PMLA, which imposes conditions for bail, was challenged by Justice Datta. The judge argued that before applying Section 45, the requirements of Section 19 must be fulfilled. If the grounds for arrest cannot be justified, the burden of proving innocence should not fall on the accused. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Agarwal, cited the Kejriwal case, where the court ruled that reasons for arrest and necessity based on evidence must be provided. Rohatgi argued that Agarwal's interim bail, granted on May 17, should be confirmed, as no scheduled offence**Supreme Court Calls for Better Prosecutions Amid Low Money Laundering Convictions** was indicated in the charge sheet. The Supreme Court upheld the interim bail granted to Agarwal and disposed of the Special Leave Petition (SLP). Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Vikas Pahwa, along with Advocates Tushar Giri and Sahil Bhalaik, represented the petitioner.
