The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002
The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA)
Overview
The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 is an important Indian law enacted to combat the problem of money laundering and to provide for the confiscation of property derived from or involved in money laundering.
Money laundering is the process of converting illegal or “dirty” money into legal or “clean” money by hiding its illegal origin. The Act aims to prevent money laundering, identify the proceeds of crime, and punish offenders engaged in this illegal activity.
Objectives of the Act
To prevent money laundering and control the flow of illicit funds.
To confiscate and seize property acquired through money laundering.
To deal with offenses connected to money laundering.
To promote transparency and accountability in financial transactions.
To comply with international conventions and agreements related to money laundering.
Key Definitions
Money Laundering: The process of concealing the origins of money obtained from criminal activities by transferring it through complex sequences of banking transfers or commercial transactions.
Proceeds of Crime: Any property derived or obtained directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity.
Enforcement Directorate (ED): The main agency responsible for investigating offenses under the PMLA.
Important Provisions of the Act
1. Offense of Money Laundering (Section 3)
A person is guilty of money laundering if they directly or indirectly attempt to indulge or knowingly assist in the process of money laundering.
The Act makes it clear that possessing, concealing, acquiring, or using proceeds of crime is an offense.
2. Attachment and Confiscation of Property (Sections 5 and 8)
The authorities have the power to attach properties suspected to be proceeds of crime during investigation.
After a trial, if the accused is convicted, the property can be confiscated by the government.
This provision is to prevent the accused from transferring or disposing of the property.
3. Search, Seizure, and Arrest
The Act empowers officers of the Enforcement Directorate and other authorities to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests related to money laundering.
They can also summon individuals for questioning and seize documents or assets.
4. Burden of Proof (Section 24)
The burden of proof shifts to the accused to show that the proceeds involved are not derived from criminal activity once the prosecution establishes a case.
This is an important provision where the usual presumption of innocence is modified.
5. Adjudicating Authority and Special Court
The Act provides for an Adjudicating Authority to determine whether the property is involved in money laundering.
Special Courts are established for speedy trial of offenses under the PMLA.
6. Punishment (Section 4)
The punishment for money laundering ranges from 3 years imprisonment to 7 years or more, along with fines.
Repeat offenders may face enhanced penalties.
Important Amendments
The Act has been amended several times to broaden its scope, including criminalizing attempts, conspiracy, and abetment of money laundering.
The powers of the Enforcement Directorate have been expanded.
The Act now also covers cases related to scheduled offenses as notified by the government.
Important Case Laws Related to PMLA
1. M/S. Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. Union of India (2017)
Issue: Whether the property attached under PMLA can be released to the accused during the investigation.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that attachment under PMLA is a civil process and does not amount to conviction. Therefore, interim relief can be granted subject to the condition that the property is not disposed of.
Significance: It balanced the rights of the accused with the need for preventing dissipation of proceeds of crime.
2. Kirit Somaiya vs. Enforcement Directorate (2017)
Issue: Can the Enforcement Directorate arrest a person under PMLA without sufficient evidence of money laundering?
Judgment: The Court held that arrests under PMLA should not be made arbitrarily and must be based on prima facie material indicating involvement in money laundering.
Significance: This protects individuals from misuse of PMLA provisions.
3. Jeeja Ghosh vs. Union of India (2016)
Issue: Whether the rights of accused under PMLA can be curtailed beyond constitutional protections.
Judgment: The Supreme Court emphasized that even under PMLA, fundamental rights including right to fair trial and due process must be upheld.
Significance: Reinforces constitutional safeguards despite stringent laws.
4. Union of India vs. Shyam Narayan Chouksey (2018)
Issue: Whether mere suspicion without concrete evidence is sufficient for attachment of property.
Judgment: The Court held that there must be prima facie satisfaction of the authority that the property is proceeds of crime before attachment.
Significance: Strengthened the procedural safeguards against arbitrary attachment.
Summary of PMLA Provisions
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Purpose | Prevent money laundering and confiscate proceeds |
| Main Offense | Money laundering of proceeds of crime |
| Investigation Agency | Enforcement Directorate (ED) |
| Property Attachment | Power to attach suspected properties |
| Trial | Special Courts designated for speedy trials |
| Burden of Proof | Shifts to accused after prosecution establishes case |
| Punishment | 3-7 years imprisonment, fines, or both |
Conclusion
The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 is a powerful law aimed at tackling the menace of money laundering in India. It combines investigative powers, preventive mechanisms, and penal provisions to ensure that the illicit flow of money is curtailed. The Act also balances enforcement with legal safeguards to protect citizens’ rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments