Supreme Court Ruling on PMLA Arrest Norms

Source-This post on Supreme Court Ruling on PMLA Arrest Norms is based on the article “SC limits ED’s power to arrest PMLA accused” published in “The Hindu” on 17th May 2024.

Why in the News?

The recent Supreme Court decision has specified the obligations to notify an accused of the reasons for their arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

About Supreme Court Ruling on PMLA Arrest Norms

1. Enhancement of Personal Liberty: The Supreme Court emphasized the right to personal liberty by stating that individuals summoned by a designated special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) are not considered to be in custody and are not required to apply for bail under the strict conditions of the PMLA.

2. Conditions for Custody: The Court also ruled that if an accused responds to a summons and appears before the special court, it does not mean they are in custody. Therefore, applying for bail is unnecessary.

3. Limitation on ED’s Powers: The judgment restricts the Directorate of Enforcement’s (ED) ability to arrest individuals after a special court has acknowledged a case. The ED must apply separately for custody and demonstrate specific reasons for needing custodial interrogation.

4. Provision for Furnishing Bonds: The Court mentioned that the special court might require the accused to provide bonds as per Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It clarified that providing a bond is merely an undertaking and does not equate to bail being granted. Thus, the stringent twin conditions of Section 45 of the PMLA do not apply when a bond is provided.

5. Bail Conditions Under PMLA: The Supreme Court highlighted the stringent conditions for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA. Under this, the accused must prove their prima facie innocence and assure the court they will not commit any further offences while on bail, placing a significant burden of proof on the accused.

UPSC Syllabus: Polity and nation