Articles
THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT UNDER THE PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT, 2002
by Rishi Batta Law FirmArticle 20(3) of the Indian Constitution protects accused
persons from being compelled to make self-incriminatory statements. The
protection from self-incrimination along with the protection from double
jeopardy as enshrined under Article 20(2) of the Constitution forms the fulcrum
of the criminal justice system in India. As a necessary corollary, any
confessional statement made before a police officer or out of coercion during
criminal proceedings is inadmissible as evidence, and the same has been
cemented in Sections 24 to 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence
Act”).
The provisions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act,
2002 (“PMLA”) take a sharp deviation from the constitutional protection from
self-incrimination. The vires of the said provisions, among others, were
challenged before the Indian Supreme Court (“SC”). The SC settled the issue by
way of its decision in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Others v. Union of India
and Others (“Judgment”), after almost a decade since the earliest batch of the
petitions were filed. Consequently, the SC upheld the status quo. Though the
Judgment is presently under review before the SC, this article respectfully
disagrees with the conclusion arrived at by the SC in the Judgment with respect
to self-incrimination.
Sponsor Ads
About Rishi Batta 
Law Firm
13 connections, 1 recommendations, 57 honor points.Joined APSense since, July 6th, 2021, From Hyderabad, India.
Created on Mar 28th 2024 11:40. Viewed 80 times.
