The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the validity of two sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Section 50 and Section 63 of this Act were challenged in a petition. Under these sections, ED officers can call anyone for questioning without assigning any reason. Apart from this, penalty can also be given for giving wrong information or not giving information.
Leader of the Opposition in Madhya Pradesh Govind Singh has filed a petition demanding removal of these two sections by terming them unconstitutional. They say that the government is harassing the opposition by using these sections. Govind Singh is a seven-time MLA. They say that these two sections of the Money Laundering Act 2002 violate the fundamental rights given in the Constitution.
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Sameer Sodhi appeared for the petitioner. He told the bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Arvind Kumar that there was a need to review these sections. The petition said that whoever is summoned under Section 50 of the Act should be told whether he is a witness or an accused in a case. Apart from this, he should also be aware of the matter in which he is being summoned.
The bench has issued notice to the Central Government and ED in this matter and said that further hearing will be held after 6 weeks. It has been said in the petition that this section violates Article 20 (3) of the Constitution. It has also been said in the petition that the statements made before any agency are not valid during the hearing in the court. It has been said in the petition that Article 21 of the Constitution talks about fair trial. Explain that in this matter, the court has sought response from the ED and the Central Government within 6 weeks. At the same time, after this, the petitioner will be given two weeks time to respond to the reply.
Get the more latest news updates