Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002

20 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

PRAGYA PRASUN & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 59930 April 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, including acid‑attack survivors with facial disfigurements and a blind individual, challenged the mandatory digital KYC/e‑KYC/video‑KYC procedures for being inaccessible and discriminatory. They argued that requirements such as capturing a live photograph and performing a liveness check (e.g., eye‑blin

PREM PRAKASHversusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 63728 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Prem Prakash was in judicial custody for a separate ECIR (No. 4 of 2022) when the Enforcement Directorate recorded statements from him under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for a new ECIR (No. 5 of 2023). The High Court had denied his bail, relying on those statements, but the

KALVAKUNTLA KAVITHAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 63227 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Kalvakuntla Kavitha, a former Member of Parliament and Legislative Council, was charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in CBI and Enforcement Directorate investigations relating to a Delhi excise policy conspiracy. She applied for bail, invoking the special treatment granted to women under the provi

RADHIKA AGARWALversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 27227 February 2025

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the amendments to the Customs Act, 1962 and the arrest provisions in the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, arguing that offences under these statutes remain non‑cognizable and that authorized officers must obtain a magistrate's warrant, relying on the Om

V. SENTHIL BALAJIversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 73926 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The former Tamil Nadu Transport Minister V. Senthil Balaji was arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for alleged involvement in a large‑scale job‑racketeering scheme, with the Enforcement Directorate filing a complaint under Section 3 of the PMLA punishable under Section 4. The High Court rejecte

M/S C.L. GUPTA EXPORT LTD.versusADIL ANSARI & ORS.

2025 INSC 103522 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s C.L. Gupta Export Ltd., was found by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to have violated environmental laws, leading the Tribunal to impose a Rs.50 crore compensation and direct the Enforcement Directorate to pursue action under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The appellant contended th

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusSUBHASH SHARMA

2025 INSC 14121 January 2025Dismissed

The Enforcement Directorate detained Subhash Sharma under a Look Out Circular at IGI Airport on 4 March 2022 and later took him into physical custody on 5 March 2022, but failed to produce him before the nearest magistrate within the statutory 24‑hour period. The High Court held that this breach of Article 22(2) of the

SATYENDAR KUMAR JAINversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 21718 March 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined bail applications of Satyendar Kumar Jain, a former Delhi minister, and his associates Vaibhav and Ankush Jain, who were charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for allegedly using shell companies to launder approximately Rs 4.81 crore through accommodation entries. The Co

TARSEM LALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT JALANDHAR ZONAL OFFICE

2024 INSC 43416 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were accused under complaints filed under section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the Special Court took cognizance of the offence under section 4 of the Act without the Enforcement Directorate having arrested them. The Court examined whether the procedural provisions of the

PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMAversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR.

2025 INSC 34916 March 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a former collector, was charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) for alleged financial transactions involving proceeds of crime arising from land allotments, bribery and hawala. He sought discharge at the pre‑trial stage, arguing that the PMLA could not be applied retrospectively

PRABIR PURKAYASTHAversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI)

2024 INSC 41415 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on 3 October 2023 without the arrest memo containing the specific grounds of arrest, only generic reasons. He was presented before a Remand Judge on 4 October 2023 and remanded to police custody, but the copy of the remand application and

NATIONAL SPOT EXCHANGE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 69414 May 2025

The Supreme Court examined whether secured creditors could claim priority over assets attached under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Maharashtra Protection of Investors and Depositors Act (MPID Act) by invoking the SARFAESI Act and the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy (RDB) Act. It also considered

PARTHA CHATTERJEEversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 62713 December 2024Disposed off

The former West Bengal Education Minister, Partha Chatterjee, was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a large‑scale teachers recruitment scam and alleged money‑laundering offences under the PMLA. After raids recovered substantial cash and gold from his associates and companies, he was denied bail

ARVIND KEJRIWALversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2024 INSC 68713 September 2024Disposed off

The appellant, a three‑time Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested by the CBI in June 2024 in connection with an FIR registered in August 2022 under sections 120B, 477A IPC and section 7 PC Act. He challenged the legality of the arrest under Sections 41A and 41(1)(b)(ii) of the CrPC and also sought regular bail. The Hig

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusNIRAJ TYAGI & ORS

2024 INSC 10613 February 2024

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) investigated money‑laundering offences arising from three FIRs and an ECIR filed against India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd (IHFL) and its officers after the financial institution recovered dues from defaulting borrowers under the SARFAESI Act. The borrowers challenged the FIRs and the ECI

THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE ASSISTANT DIRECTORversusKANHAIYA PRASAD

2025 INSC 21012 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India, represented by the Enforcement Directorate, appealed against a Patna High Court order that granted regular bail to Kanhaiya Prasad in a PMLA case involving alleged money laundering of proceeds from illegal sand mining by his father. The High Court had released the respondent without satisfying the t

ARVIND KEJRIWALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 40010 May 2024

Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested on 21 March 2024 by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with alleged offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and related statutes. He challenged the arrest before the Supreme Court, arguing that the legality of his detention was sub judic

ABHISHEK BANERJEE & ANR.versusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 6689 September 2024Dismissed

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) issued multiple summons under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) requiring the appellants, Abhishek Banerjee and Rujira Banerjee, to appear in Delhi and produce documents related to a coal theft and money‑laundering investigation. The appellants challenged the s

KUSHAL KUMAR AGARWALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2025 INSC 7609 May 2025Case Partly allowed

A complaint under Section 44(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was filed on 2 August 2024 naming the appellant as an accused. The Special Judge took cognizance of the offence without first giving the accused an opportunity to be heard, contrary to the proviso to sub‑section (1) of Section 223 of the

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusADITYA SARDA

2025 INSC 4778 April 2025Disposed off

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) investigated alleged fraud involving the Adarsh Group and filed a criminal complaint before a Special Court, which took cognizance of offences under the Companies Act, 2013 and the IPC and issued bailable and later non‑bailable warrants against 16 respondents. The responden

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search