In a significant judgment on July 12, the Supreme Court of India ruled against the arbitrary exercise of arrest powers by officers of the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The court emphasized that the authority to arrest cannot be wielded based on subjective whims and must instead be grounded in objective considerations of incriminating evidence. The verdict, authored by Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, addressed concerns over the potential violation of Article 21 rights pertaining to life and liberty. This ruling stemmed from a petition by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal challenging his arrest by the ED, for which the court granted interim bail.
BulletsIn
- Supreme Court restricts arbitrary arrests under PMLA by ED.
- ED’s power to arrest must be based on objective evidence.
- Concerns were raised over the potential violation of Article 21 rights.
- The ruling is based on a petition filed by Arvind Kejriwal.
- Interim bail was granted to Kejriwal during the proceedings.
- Justices Khanna and Datta authored the landmark judgment.
- ED officers must justify reasons for arrest in writing.
- Emphasis on fair consideration of all evidence, not just incriminating.
- Subjective opinions of officers must be based on substantial evidence.
- Court calls for uniformity and fairness in ED’s arrest policies.
