Landmark Judgments on PMLA Supreme Court of India Judgements
| 1 | DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Vs ADITYA TRIPATHI – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 410 Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,C.T. RAVIKUMAR – Respondent no. 1 arrested – Thereafter, the High Court enlarged the respondent No.1 on bail – Sustainability of – Held: Not sustainable – High Court did not consider the rigour of s. 45 nor considered the seriousness of the offences alleged against accused for the schedule offences under the pmla Act Date of decision : 12-05-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1401/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 2 | RITU CHHABARIA Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 826 Judge Name: KRISHNA MURARI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR indefeasible right of the accused even in matters under pmla . 27. Therefore, in light of the abovementioned discussions, it can be seen that the practice of filing preliminary reports before the enactment of the present CrPC has now taken the form of filing chargesheets without actually Date of decision : 26-04-2023 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/60/2023 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 3 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ANOOP BARTARIA & ETC Vs DY. DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE & ANR. – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 531 Judge Name: ) and insertion of the Explanation to s.45, and non-amendment in the short title of s.45, it is clear that all the offences under the pmla were, are and shall be “cognizable and non-bailable offences” notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the CrPC – Accordingly, the officers Date of decision : 21-04-2023 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/2397/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 4 | SANJAY RAGHUNATH AGARWAL Vs THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 461 Judge Name: V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN,PANKAJ MITHAL valid argument that the second condition found in Clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 45 of pmla is satisfied qua the appellant – The continued incarceration of the appellant not justified – Appellant directed to be enlarged on bail. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No Date of decision : 20-04-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1198/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 5 | ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Vs KAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR. ETC – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 918 Judge Name: K.M. JOSEPH,HRISHIKESH ROY,B.V. NAGARATHNA arrested on 14.05.2020 for alleged commission of offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter ‘ pmla ’) and were remanded on the same date. On 11.07.2020 through e-mail, the Enforcement Directorate (hereinafter ‘ED’) claimed to file a Complaint and Date of decision : 27-03-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/701/2020 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered |
| 6 | THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Vs M. GOPAL REDDY & ANR – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 79 Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,C.T. RAVIKUMAR under the provisions of Section 17(1) of pmla , 2002. Accordingly, 18 premises were searched including the residences of the promoters and offices of M/s Mantena Constructions Ltd, M/s Anteras Pvt Ltd, M/s Osmo IT Solutions Pvt Ltd, M/s Arni Infra, etc. a good amount of incriminating documents and Date of decision : 24-02-2023 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/534/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 7 | RANA AYYUB Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR – [2023] 3 S.C.R. 892 Judge Name: V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J.B. PARDIWALA scheduled offences – Held: A combined reading of Section 44 of the pmla and the provisions of Sections 177 to 184 of the Cr.P.C. will make it clear that in view of the specific mandate of clauses (a) and (c) of subsection (1) of Section 44, it is the Special Court constituted under the pmla that Date of decision : 07-02-2023 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/12/2023 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 8 | BIKRAM CHATTERJI & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS – [2022] 9 S.C.R. 239 Judge Name: UDAY UMESH LALIT,BELA M. TRIVEDI . Therefore, the attachment effected in terms of the Order dated 11.01.2021 passed by this Court may suitably be modified. b. Considering the nature of circumstances, the entire exercise be undertaken in this Court rather than relegating Mr. Prem Mishra to the proceedings before the pmla Authorities Date of decision : 07-11-2022 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/940/2017 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued |
| 9 | UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Vs M/s. GANPATI DEALCOM PVT. LTD. – [2022] 12 S.C.R. 320 Judge Name: N.V. RAMANA,KRISHNA MURARI,HIMA KOHLI , Kennedy v Mendoza-Martinez, 372 US 144 (1963) – referred to. 3.7 In Vijay Madanlal Choudary & Ors v. Union of India, SLP (Civ.) No. 4634 of 2014 and others, this Court dealt with confiscation proceedings under Section 8 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“ pmla ”) and limited the Date of decision : 23-08-2022 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/5783/2022 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 10 | VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2022] 6 S.C.R. 382 Judge Name: A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR , Government of India, ILR 2017 Kar 1846; Ajay Kumar Gupta & Ors. v. Adjudicating Authority ( pmla ) & Ors. (2017) 2 LW (Cri) 252; State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi & Anr. (1972) 2 SCC 890 : [1973] 1 SCR 1004; Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Amritsar v. Suresh Seth, (1981) 2 SCC 790 : [1981] 3 SCR 419 Date of decision : 27-07-2022 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/4634/2014 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered | Direction Issue : Issues Answered |
| 11 | English ગુજરાતી – Gujarati Disclaimer SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – [2022] 10 S.C.R. 351 Judge Name: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,M.M. SUNDRESH years. C) Offences punishable under Special Acts containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS (S.37), pmla (S.45), UAPA (S.43D(5), Companies Act, 212(6), etc. D) Economic offences not covered by Special Acts. REQUISITE CONDITIONS 1) Not arrested during investigation. 2) Cooperated Date of decision : 11-07-2022 | Case Number : MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION/1849/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 12 | J. SEKAR @SEKAR REDDY Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – [2022] 3 S.C.R. 698 Judge Name: VINEET SARAN,J.K. MAHESHWARI amount of currency notes and gold from the appellant – Registration of FIR against the appellant under the provisions of pmla in addition to schedule offences under the Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act – Petition seeking quashing of proceedings – Dismissed by the High Court – On appeal Date of decision : 05-05-2022 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/738/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 13 | NATIONAL SPOT EXCHANGE LIMITED Vs MR. ANIL KOHLI, RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL FOR DUNAR FOODS LIMITED – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 1024 Judge Name: M.R. SHAH,ANIRUDDHA BOSE submitted that Shri Surender Gupta is the promoter and managing director of the corporate debtor. It is submitted that even Shri Surender Gupta in his statement given under Section 50 pmla before the Enforcement Directorate has confirmed that he was managing the affairs of PD Agro and that PD Agro Date of decision : 14-09-2021 | Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL/6187/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 14 | OPTO CIRCUIT INDIA LTD. Vs AXIS BANK & ORS. – [2021] 2 S.C.R. 81 Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN Enforcement initiated the proceedings against the appellant under pmla – In the said process the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement through the communication dated 15.05.2020 addressed to the Anti Money-Laundering (AML) Officer of Respondents No.1 to 3 Banks instructed them that the Date of decision : 03-02-2021 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/102/2021 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed |
| 15 | NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR PEOPLE’S MOVEMENTS & ORS. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. – [2020] 8 S.C.R. 997 Judge Name: S.A. BOBDE,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN of 7 years or less, (ii) The convicted persons whose sentence is above 7 years and (iii) The undertrial prisoners or convicted persons who are booked for serious economic offences/ bank scams and offences under Special Acts such as MCOC, pmla etc. – The petitioners alleged discrimination in Date of decision : 22-09-2020 | Case Number : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/4116/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 16 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer P. CHIDAMBARAM Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – [2019] 14 S.C.R. 450 Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,A.S. BOPANNA,HRISHIKESH ROY (hereinafter referred to as ECIR case) under section 3 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter pmla ), punishable under section 4 of the said Act against the accused mentioned in the FIR. The allegations in the said ECIR case were the same as those in the aforementioned FIR. The Date of decision : 04-12-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1831/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 17 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer P. CHIDAMBARAM Vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – [2019] 12 S.C.R. 172 Judge Name: R. BANUMATHI,A.S. BOPANNA minister – CBI registered FIR against the appellant and other accused persons u/s.120 IPC r/w. s.420 IPC, s.8 and s.13(2) r/w. s.13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Enforcement Directorate also registered a case u/ss.3 and 4 of pmla against the accused persons – High Court dismissed Date of decision : 05-09-2019 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1340/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 18 | JUSTICE K. S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2018] 8 S.C.R. 1 Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,A.K. SIKRI,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR,ASHOK BHUSHAN as amended by the Prevention of Money-Laundering (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017 is unconstitutional – Held:r.9 as amended by pmla (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017 is not unconstitutional and does not violate Arts.14, 19(1)(g), 21 & 300A of the Constitution and ss.3, 7 & 51 of the Aadhaar Act Date of decision : 26-09-2018 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/494/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 19 | English हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PANKAJ JAIN Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 248 Judge Name: A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN Cr.P.C. read with Section 65 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act. In the above context, following has been observed in Para 11:- “11. On the same principles, in absence of anything inconsistent in pmla with section 88 of Cr.P.C., when a person voluntarily appears before the Special Court for Date of decision : 23-02-2018 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/321/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 20 | ROHIT TANDON Vs THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 156 Judge Name: DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR registered at the instance of A~sistant Director ( pmla ), Directorate of Enforcement, empowered to investigate the offences punishable under the Act of2002. 2. The appellant first approached the Additional Sessions Judge- 02, South East Sake! Court, New Delhi for releasing him on bail by way of Date of decision : 10-11-2017 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1878/2017 |
| 21 | MANOHAR LAL SHARMA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. – [2017] 10 S.C.R. 562 Judge Name: ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT out any direction which SIT or Supreme Court may give in tlie other pending writpetition being WP(C) No.176 of 2009 – Writ petition disposed of – Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 ( pmla , 2002) – G Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA, 1967)-s.51A SEBI (Foreign Portfolio Date of decision : 09-10-2017 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/65/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
| 22 | GAUTAM KUNDU Vs MANOJ KUMAR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, EASTERN REGION, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT(PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT) GOVT. OF INDIA – [2015] 15 S.C.R. 499 Judge Name: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,R.K. AGRAWAL – Prosecution u/s. 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 ( pmla ) – Proceedings u/s. 24 of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (SEBI Act) pending – Bail application u/s. 439 Cr.P. C. – Rejected by High Court on the ground that there was no order holding D that no offence was made Date of decision : 16-12-2015 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1706/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed |
| 23 | UNION OF INDIA Vs HASSAN ALI KHAN AND ANR. – [2011] 11 S.C.R. 778 Judge Name: ALTAMAS KABIR,S.S. NIJJAR March, 2011, and, thereafter, he was produced before the Special Judge, pmla , Mumbai, on 8th March, 2011, and was remanded in custody: Subsequently, by an order dated 11th March, 2011, the Special Judge, pmla , rejected the prayer made on behalf of the Directorate of Enforcement for B remand of Date of decision : 30-09-2011 | Case Number : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1883/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed |
| 24 | PAREENA SWARUP Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 1217 Judge Name: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,P. SATHASIVAM powers between F judiciary and executives. .. 4. Rule 32(2) of pmla which provides for removal of Chairperson/Members of Tribunal under pmladoes not provide adequate safety to the tenure of the Chairperson/ Members of the Tribunal. G 5. Rule 6(2) of Appellate Tribunal Rules is vague to the Date of decision : 30-09-2008 | Case Number : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/634/2007 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off |
Advocate Supreme Court of India | Lawyer Supreme Court Delhi 