[ad_1]
The Supreme Court said that the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) cannot be equated with FIR and ECIR is an internal document of the Enforcement Directorate. Supply of ECIR to the accused is not mandatory and only disclosure of reasons during arrest is enough, said SC.
The top court delivered its verdict on a batch of petitions concerning the interpretation of certain provisions of the PMLA.
On July 15, the Supreme Court said that its judgement on the pleas challenging the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was almost ready.
The top court had earlier reserved its order on a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Prominent names like Karti Chidambaram and former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti were among the petitioners in the case.
Their petitions raised multiple issues including the absence of a procedure to commence investigation and summoning, while the accused was not made aware of the contents of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR).
Mufti had challenged constitutional vires of section 50, and any incidental provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Section 50 of the PMLA empowers the ‘authority’ i.e. officers of the Enforcement Directorate, to summon any person to give evidence or produce records. All persons summoned are bound to answer questions put to them, and to produce the documents as required by the ED officers, failing which they can be penalised under the PMLA.
However, the Centre had justified the constitutional validity of the provisions of PMLA.
(with inputs from ANI)
[ad_2]
Source link