SC permits liquor scam accused to withdraw plea against PMLA
The Supreme Court on Tuesday permitted six people being investigated in the Chhattisgarh liquor to withdraw their challenge to crucial provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and prevented them from again approaching the court on this issue except for seeking bail and protection from arrest . The withdrawal was prompted by a statement by the court on Monday that it was not inclined to hear challenges to PMLA.
A vacation bench of justices Bela M Trivedi and Prashant Kumar Mishra, while permitting the seven petitions to be withdrawn, said that filing of such petitions where constitutional validity of PMLA provisions are being challenged has become a trend. As most of these petitions also sought protection from arrest from the top court, the bench observed: “This has become an alternate means to bypass approaching the high courts under Section 438 of CrPC for anticipatory bail.”
On Monday, the court indicated that it was not inclined to entertain such petitions because a Supreme Court judgment by a three-judge bench in the Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary case on July 27 last year upheld all contentious provisions of PMLA. The judgment was binding on courts and there was no reason for such petitions to be filed reopening validity of the PMLA provisions, specifically Section 50 (power to issue summons and seek attendance) and Section 63 (punishment for giving false information), which already stood decided, it said.
Appearing for two of the petitioners, Akhtar Dhebar and Chhattisgarh excise commissioner Niranjan Das, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi informed the court that he had instructions from his clients to withdraw the plea. The same request was made by senior advocate Siddharth Aggarwal appearing for two other accused, Achaljeet Singh Bhatia and Pinki Singh.
The court permitted them to withdraw the petitions while granting them the liberty to apply for bail or seek orders for quashing of the enforcement case information report (ECIR). Two other accused, Abhishek Singh and Laxminarayan Aggarwal, were also allowed to withdraw their petitions.
The petitions piggybacked on an order passed by the top court on March 28, where notice was issued on a petition filed by Congress leader of opposition from Madhya Pradesh, Govind Singh. The petition challenged validity of sections 50 and 63 of PMLA as being violative of Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which protects a citizen from being compelled to be a witness against himself, and Article 21 that deals with an individual’s right to life and liberty.
The two provisions of PMLA required a person to speak truth on being summoned by the Enforcement Directorate and the testimony was admissible as evidence during trial.
ED began its probe into allegations of selective grant of liquor licenses in Chhattisgarh on a commission that surfaced out of a 2022 income-tax department charge sheet filed against IAS officer Anil Tuteja and others before a Delhi court.
ED claimed that illegal profit of ₹2,000 crore was earned by a syndicate involving politicians, bureaucrats and private individuals during 2019-23.