The Supreme Court announced today, that it will review the petitions seeking a reassessment of the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India judgment, which affirmed the constitutionality of several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The hearing is scheduled for August 5.
According to the previous order, the bench was scheduled to begin hearing the case tomorrow. However, during a courtroom session today before a bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju is currently facing some personal difficulties.
"There is some personal difficulty. Mr. Raju is in some real personal difficulty in Ahmedabad.," submitted Mehta. Following this, he pleaded with the Court to post the matter for hearing anytime after two weeks.
Keeping this in view, the Court posted the matter on August 5.
On November 23, 2023, a Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, and Bela M. Trivedi, which was previously handling the pleas, was dissolved. This was due to the union government requesting additional time to prepare and Justice Kaul’s imminent retirement. Consequently, a request was made to Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, to form a new Bench, resulting in Justice Sundresh replacing Justice Kaul.
In March, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing some of the petitioners, emphasized the urgency of the matter. In response, the Special Bench scheduled hearings for July 23rd, 24th, and 25th, 2024, though this arrangement was contingent on the Chief Justice of India’s orders. Additionally, the Bench allowed the petitioners and appellants to submit bail applications to the relevant forums, with these applications to be addressed according to the law, regardless of the pending petitions or appeals before the Supreme Court.
During the proceedings before the previous Bench, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the 3-Judge Bench lacked the authority to hear the pleas or 'sit in appeal' over the Coordinate Bench's judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. However, these objections were not convincing enough to persuade the court to postpone the hearing.
Notably, during those proceedings, concerns were raised about the classification of the PMLA as a regulatory rather than a penal statute, issues surrounding the capacity in which the agency summons individuals, and the lack of provision of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), among other matters.Besides the instant pleas, a review petition against the Vijay Madanlal judgment is pending before the top court, which is yet to be listed.
Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement v. M/s Obulapuram Mining Company Private Limited | Criminal Appeal No. 1269 of 2017 (and connected matters)
