NEW DELHI: Banks returned Rs 18,000 crore in the case of Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi, and Mehul Choksi, Attorney General Tushar Mehta, on Thursday (February 23), told the Supreme Court.
Mehta, representing the Commission, dismissed before a seat presided over by Judge AM Khanwilkar that the total proceeds of crimes in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) pending before the high court was Rs. 67,000 crore.
He added that 4,700 cases are being investigated by the Directorate of Enforcement and that the number of cases received for investigation each year in the last 5 years varies from 111 cases in 2015-16 to 981 a year 2020-21. Mehta left before the seat that Rs 18,000 crore has been returned to the banks in the case of Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi and Mehul Choksi.
The Supreme Court hears the plea of plea, challenging the magnitude of the powers that come to the direction of the implementation of (ED) for the detection, seizure, investigation, and attachment of the proceeds of crime under the law.
Mehta has left before the bench, also in the presence of Judges Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar, that during the last five years (2016-17 to 2020-21), only 2,086 cases were accepted for trial under the PMLA from the approximate FIR registry. 33 lakh for alleged offenses by the police and other enforcement agencies.
He added, “a small number of cases were raised for investigation under the PMLA as compared to the annual registration of cases under the Fund Act in the UK (7,900), US (1,532), China (4,691), Austria. (1,036), Hongkong (1,823), Belgium (1,862) and Russia (2,764) ”.
Mehta emphasized that measures against money laundering have left the fetus of medicine or related terrorism in public and moved beyond the same. “Furthermore, efforts against money laundering have always been recommended to incorporate a larger proportion of predictive offenses in domestic law,” he added.
A few weeks ago, a battery of senior advocates, including Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mukul Rohatgi, Sidharth Luthra, Amit Desai, and others filed before the high court on several related grounds misuse of PMLA provisions introduced by way of amendments to the Act. Also Read: Vodafone looks to sell $ 2.5 billion worth of wood at Indus Towers
The law has been criticized on a number of fronts: harsh bail conditions, non-disclosure of arrest warrants, arrest without charge of ECIR (crab to FIR), broad definitions of money laundering and crime offenses, and the information provided by the plaintiff during the investigation is accepted as evidence during the trial. Also Read: LPG gas price doubled from April? This is why you may need to release wallet phrases