Custodial remand under PMLA upheld where written grounds of arrest were supplied and material showed alleged money-laundering involvement.
Custodial remand to the Directorate of Enforcement was examined against Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, focusing on whether written grounds of arrest were supplied and whether the remand court applied its mind to the material indicating involvement in money laundering. The remand record showed that the Sessions Court perused the written grounds of arrest, recorded that they were supplied to the accused, and considered the investigation material concerning the accused's alleged role in the company structure and the wider conspiracy. The court distinguished the precedent relied on by the petitioner and found that the remand was not based merely on non-cooperation, but on material supporting the investigating officer's view. The remand order was therefore upheld as valid.
Issues: Whether the remand order granting custodial remand to the Directorate of Enforcement was vitiated for want of compliance with Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, including the requirement of written grounds of arrest and the existence of reason to believe that the accused was guilty of money laundering.
Analysis: The petition challenged only the remand order and not the arrest memo or arrest order. The remand record showed that the Sessions Court had perused the written grounds of arrest and had recorded that they were supplied to the accused. The order also reflected consideration of the investigation material, the petitioner's alleged role in the incorporation and operation of the company structure, and the basis on which the investigating officer formed the view that the petitioner was involved in the offence of money laundering. The Court distinguished the case from the precedent relied upon by the petitioner, noting that the impugned order did not suffer from the absence of any finding on the grounds of arrest or the statutory requirements. The Court further held that the remand was not founded merely on non-cooperation or evasive replies, but also on the material indicating the petitioner's alleged involvement in the larger conspiracy and the proceeds of crime.
Conclusion: The remand order was valid and no infirmity was shown in the custody granted to the Directorate of Enforcement.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
