New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the validity of the stringent law. Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED). This allowed the agency to arrest people and conduct searches and seizures even when no complaint was registered, to give acceptable statements in court and to put the burden of proving their innocence on the accused.
“Money laundering cannot be said to be less heinous than the crime of terrorism,” the court said. In a 545-page judgment penned by Justice AM Khanwilkar, the Supreme Court closely examined all the controversial provisions of the PMLA, which were challenged by the petitioners, and found all of them valid.
Approving the stringent provisions of PMLA on Wednesday, the Supreme Court said, “tainted money creates dissatisfaction in any society and in turn leads to more crime and civil unrest, and thus, imposes such money on the government and the people.” The liability to identify and confiscate is heavy”.
“If there are any proactive steps for a cause like this, we can’t facilitate good moves,” he said.
A bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar said the menace of money laundering, which is the most suitable mode of transaction for criminals and a means of livelihood for drug dealers, terrorists and white-collar criminals, must be dealt with sternly.
“Further, we do not agree with the observations that suggest that the offense of money laundering is a less heinous offense than the offense of terrorism sought to be tackled under the TADA Act or that there is an imperative State interest in dealing with the offense of money laundering. International bodies have been discussing the menace of money laundering on a regular basis for quite some time; and strongly recommended the enforcement of stringent laws to prevent and combat the menace of money laundering, including the prosecution of criminals and attachment of proceeds. and confiscation. The offense has a direct impact on the sovereignty and integrity of financial systems and countries,” the bench said.
The court further observed that money laundering is not a general offense and there is a need for special legislation to prevent and combat the menace by making provisions for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of the offense and prosecution of the accused. “Today, if one delve deep into financial systems, anywhere in the world, it is seen that once a financial mastermind can integrate illicit money into the bloodstream of an economy, it is almost indistinguishable. In fact, Money can easily be wired abroad at a click of the mouse. It is also well known that once this money leaves the country, it is almost impossible to get it back,” it said.
The court observed that the state is bound to secure social, economic and political justice and reduce inequalities of income and prevent concentration of wealth to achieve its socialist goal and it becomes imperative for the state to enact such laws. , which not only ensure that unaccounted money is pumped back into the economic system of the country, but it also prevents any activity that damages the economic fabric of the nation.
“Money Laundering is one of the heinous crimes, which not only affects the social and economic fabric of the nation but also promotes other heinous crimes, such as terrorism, offenses related to NDPS Act, etc. It is one of the heinous crimes. The proven fact is that international criminal networks that support domestic extremist groups depend on the transfer of unaccounted money across the country, thus, by any stretch of the imagination, it cannot be said that for the crime of money There is no compulsive state interest in providing stringent conditions of bail-laundering,” it said.
“Money laundering cannot be said to be less heinous than the crime of terrorism,” the court said. In a 545-page judgment penned by Justice AM Khanwilkar, the Supreme Court closely examined all the controversial provisions of the PMLA, which were challenged by the petitioners, and found all of them valid.
Approving the stringent provisions of PMLA on Wednesday, the Supreme Court said, “tainted money creates dissatisfaction in any society and in turn leads to more crime and civil unrest, and thus, imposes such money on the government and the people.” The liability to identify and confiscate is heavy”.
“If there are any proactive steps for a cause like this, we can’t facilitate good moves,” he said.
A bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar said the menace of money laundering, which is the most suitable mode of transaction for criminals and a means of livelihood for drug dealers, terrorists and white-collar criminals, must be dealt with sternly.
“Further, we do not agree with the observations that suggest that the offense of money laundering is a less heinous offense than the offense of terrorism sought to be tackled under the TADA Act or that there is an imperative State interest in dealing with the offense of money laundering. International bodies have been discussing the menace of money laundering on a regular basis for quite some time; and strongly recommended the enforcement of stringent laws to prevent and combat the menace of money laundering, including the prosecution of criminals and attachment of proceeds. and confiscation. The offense has a direct impact on the sovereignty and integrity of financial systems and countries,” the bench said.
The court further observed that money laundering is not a general offense and there is a need for special legislation to prevent and combat the menace by making provisions for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of the offense and prosecution of the accused. “Today, if one delve deep into financial systems, anywhere in the world, it is seen that once a financial mastermind can integrate illicit money into the bloodstream of an economy, it is almost indistinguishable. In fact, Money can easily be wired abroad at a click of the mouse. It is also well known that once this money leaves the country, it is almost impossible to get it back,” it said.
The court observed that the state is bound to secure social, economic and political justice and reduce inequalities of income and prevent concentration of wealth to achieve its socialist goal and it becomes imperative for the state to enact such laws. , which not only ensure that unaccounted money is pumped back into the economic system of the country, but it also prevents any activity that damages the economic fabric of the nation.
“Money Laundering is one of the heinous crimes, which not only affects the social and economic fabric of the nation but also promotes other heinous crimes, such as terrorism, offenses related to NDPS Act, etc. It is one of the heinous crimes. The proven fact is that international criminal networks that support domestic extremist groups depend on the transfer of unaccounted money across the country, thus, by any stretch of the imagination, it cannot be said that for the crime of money There is no compulsive state interest in providing stringent conditions of bail-laundering,” it said.