The Supreme Court held that Trial or investigation in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cases can not stay where no coercive simpliciter has been passed.
A batch of pleas has challenged the constitutional validity of the relevant provision of the PMLA Act, sought for quashing of proceedings, grant of interim relief of staying further proceedings related to the issuance of summons under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 during the pendency of pleas and directing no coercive steps to be taken in connection with the issuance of summons, not even a single order had been brought to court’s notice granting similar reliefs and said that the petitioners were relying on orders passed in other connected cases.
The three-judge bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Krishna Murari, and Justice V Ramasubramanian while directing the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation and granting them the liberty to take recourse of remedies available under law said that with regards to the order passed by this court, it related to no coercive steps. This order does not result in staying the trial or investigation. That will proceed in accordance with the law. Petitioners in the concerned cases can take remedies in accordance with the law.
“We’re likely to first hear the matters seeking for no coercive action & then we’ll have to consider the cases wherein the interim orders have been passed & wherein additional conditions need to be added. we’ll consider as to where orders for no coercive action have been passed, can additional conditions be imposed on them or not,” the bench said.
The Supreme Court permitted the Investigating Agency to insist on depositing the passport or complying with any other condition imposed by the agency irrespective of order for no coercive simpliciter.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
