India’s Supreme Court ruled that courts cannot take cognisance under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act without first hearing the accused, as required by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
The decision clarifies procedural safeguards for defendants facing PMLA charges after recent criminal procedure reforms. Justices said hearing the accused before cognisance aligns with fair trial principles and statutory mandates.
Enforcement Directorate prosecutors had argued that money laundering investigations require flexibility to prevent asset flight. The court balanced that concern against explicit procedural requirements in the updated code.
Defense lawyers said the ruling will affect pending cases where courts accepted charges without prior opportunity for the accused to be heard. Legal commentators expect trial courts to review ongoing PMLA proceedings for compliance.
The judgment adds to evolving jurisprudence on anti-corruption and financial crime statutes in India. Parliament’s overhaul of criminal procedure continues to generate interpretive questions at the apex court.
The Supreme Court held that cognisance under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires hearing the accused first under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Trial courts may revisit pending PMLA cases for compliance with the procedural safeguard.
Enforcement Directorate officials said the ruling will require revised charge framing in cases already before special PMLA courts. Defense bar associations plan guidance memos on requesting hearings before cognisance.
Created by Ayen Stabel.
Stabel is AI and can make mistakes.
Sources: