<\/a>What are the concerns regarding the PMLA Act?<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n1. Inclusion of minor and less serious offences: <\/strong>Inclusion of other less serious offences in the schedule dilutes the original intent of the law. The schedule of the Act has been expanded over the years, to include even minor and non-serious offences<\/span> such as copyright and trademark infringements<\/span>.<\/p>\n2. Equates punishment for ordinary crimes with serious crimes: <\/strong>PMLA equates the punishment under an ordinary crime with a serious economic offence. For e.g.<\/strong>\u00a0With the addition of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/span> to the schedule of offences, PMLA applies with all its rigour to public servants<\/span>. Thus, a public servant charged with corruption and a hard-core drug trafficker are treated alike<\/span>.<\/p>\n3. Broad Definition of ‘Proceeds of Crime’:<\/strong>\u00a0The broad definition of ‘proceeds of crime, provides considerable discretion to the authorities<\/span>. Critics fear that this discretion, in determination of ‘proceeds of crime’, can be misused by the investigating authorities.<\/p>\n4. Stringent Bail Conditions:<\/strong>\u00a0An accused is denied bail by the entire hierarchy of courts<\/span> because the bail provision under PMLA<\/span> state that a judge can give bail only when he is satisfied that the accused is innocent<\/span>. This is against the Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence<\/span>, which presumes a person innocent until proven guilty.<\/p>\n5. Burden of Proof of innocence on the accused:<\/strong>\u00a0The burden of proof of innocence, on the accused, presents a prominent challenge in ensuring a free and fair trial<\/span>.<\/p>\n6. Against the Federal principles and Basic structure Doctrine: <\/strong>Under the PMLA, the ED<\/span>, can carry out investigation without the prior consent of the concerned State<\/span>. This is unlike other central police organisations, (like CBI), which are required to obtain the consent of the state before carrying out any policing\/investigating activity. This impinges the principle of federalism<\/span>, which is part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.<\/p>\n7. Violation of the Fundamental Rights of Accused:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n- Violation of Article 21:<\/strong>\u00a0Under PMLA, the ED does not require disclosing the details of Enforcement Case Information Report<\/span> (ECIR<\/span>)<\/strong>, which contains the allegations against the accused person. This is against the fundamental<\/span> right of the accused to be informed of the charges and allegations<\/span>, which is a universally recognised right, and is part of the right to life and liberty under Article 21<\/span><\/span> of the Constitution.<\/li>\n
- Violation of Article 14:<\/strong>\u00a0Equating the punishment of accused of minor crimes and serious economic offence, is violation of the fundamental right to equality<\/span> under Article 14 of the constitution.<\/li>\n
- Violation of Article 20(3):<\/strong>\u00a0The power of the authorities to issue summons to ‘any person’ (including the accused), to give evidence or produce records<\/span> during the course of an investigation is in violation of the right against self-incrimination<\/span>, which is a fundamental right under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
8. Extensive powers to the authorities:<\/strong> The Act grants the Enforcement Directorate (ED) extensive powers of summons, arrest, and raids. This excessive power to the authorities, can potentially lead to its misuse and overreach. SC held that to initiate prosecution under Section 3 of PMLA, registration as scheduled offence is a prerequisite, but for initiating attachment of property under Section 5, there need not be a pre-registered criminal case. This provision has often been misused by authorities with politically motivated intentions.<\/p>\n9. Low Conviction Rate:\u00a0<\/strong>According the the Report submitted by the FM in the Rajya Sabha, 5892 cases were taken up by the ED under PMLA since 2015. Of these cases, only 15 convictions have been ordered by the special courts.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/pmla.png?resize=602%2C1024&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\n