Supreme Court bench hears PMLA and challenges hearing over 400 petitions against these laws

The Supreme Court is expected to hear a batch of petitions from May 1 challenging criminal provisions under five laws in terms of their compatibility with the protection afforded to suspects under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the Constitution.

The series of more than 400 petitions challenges provisions of the Goods and Services Tax Act, the Customs Act, the Companies Act, the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, and the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) . .

The cases are submitted to a Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna, M. M. Sundresh And Bela M Trivedi.

The same Bench will also hear the matter on the validity of provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

In short, the batch of petitions relating to the GST Act states that the proceedings before the Directorate General of GST Intelligence are taking on a criminal law character without adequate safeguards.

“The power to arrest and prosecute is not ancillary and/or subordinate to the power to levy and collect GST. Further, Entry 93 of List I confers jurisdiction on Parliament to make criminal laws only in respect of matters in List I and not on GST. Article 20(3) protection is not available to a person summoned under Article 70. 11. No protection is available to the person summoned under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.” mentions one of the resources.

In a similar vein, the pleas challenging the provisions of the Companies Act in this regard infringe upon the powers and procedure of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO). It is stated that the bail conditions under the law are unreasonable, drastic and contrary to the presumption of innocence.

The Black Money Act petitions are about challenging the penalties and prosecution prescribed in the law. They mainly attack two sections.

First, Article 54 of the law, which provides for the presumption of a culpable mental condition on the part of the suspect, violates the generally accepted principle of innocent until proven guilty. Secondly, Section 55 of the Act provides for prosecution by the Chief Commissioner without following the processes under the CrPC.

The Customs Act petitions similarly challenge a proceeding before the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for violation of the protections available to suspects under the CrPC and the Constitution.

The challenges to criminal prosecution under the FCRA lie on similar grounds.

Advocates Ashish Batra and Vivek Gurnani are lead counsel for the petitions challenging provisions of the Customs Act. Advocate Malak Bhatt and Kanu Agrawal for the Companies Act, advocate for Rajat Mittal and Annam Venkatesh for the (Central) Goods and Services Tax Act, and advocate for Vivek Gurnani for the Black Money Act.