LawLoveLegal

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has approached the Supreme Court of India , challenging the Bombay High Court’s order that declared the arrest of former Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation (VVCMC) chief Anilkumar Pawar as illegal and ordered his immediate release. The ED, through a Special Leave Petition (SLP) , has also sought a stay on the High Court’s order pending final adjudication. The plea is expected to be heard on Friday before the Supreme Court bench. High Court’s Findings: Arrest Declared Illegal and Arbitrary In a strongly worded order, the Bombay High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad criticised the ED’s actions, terming the arrest “arbitrary, illegal and unsupported by evidence.” The court observed that the arrest violated Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 , as well as Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India , which guarantee equality before law, freedom of mov...

Court Emphasizes Procedural Safeguards Under PMLA The Delhi High Court has ruled that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) must strictly follow the procedures laid down in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) when seeking to retain seized or frozen property. The judgment reinforces that procedural safeguards are crucial to protect individuals’ rights from arbitrary retention of property. A bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vadiyanathan Shankar delivered the verdict on Friday, making it clear that ED cannot directly seek the adjudicating authority’s approval for retention without first issuing a formal order. Requirement of a Formal Order Before Retention According to the court, before the ED approaches the adjudicating authority, an authorised officer must pass a formal order explaining why retention for up to 180 days is necessary. Without this essential step, the adjudicating authority has no legal basis to determine whether the seized property is ...