Today, On 11th August, the Supreme Court said, “Not a Constitutional Flaw, But About Breaches in Individual Cases” while rejecting Bhupesh Baghel’s plea challenging Section 44 of the PMLA. The court upheld ED’s investigation powers.
The Supreme Court of India heard a petition filed by former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel and his son Chaitanya Baghel in a money laundering case.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing the Baghels, argued that under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), only Section 44 allows Enforcement Directorate (ED) officers to carry out further investigation.
He said,
“Under the PMLA only Section 44 permits further investigation by ED officers and an explanation in the statute cannot serve as the basis for conferring such power.”
Justice Joymalya Bagchi responded by saying,
“The investigation is never qua an accused it is qua a incident. What the law said was not conferring a power but recognising residual power of investigation agency to find out the truth. There cannot be embargo on that. The explanation is nothing but an enabling provision.”
Justice Surya Kant added,
“If they’re acting contrary to the provision you can always go to the High Court.”
Also Read: ED Raids Ex-Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel’s Son, Others in Liquor Scam Case
Justice Bagchi further explained,
“This is about breaches in individual cases not a constitutional flaw in the legislation.”
Kapil Sibal expressed concerns about the treatment of the accused, stating,
“They force the accused to make statement, please pass some orders. This is an important issue.”
The Supreme Court referred to paragraph 263 of the Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary judgment, where a three-judge bench had ruled that “authorities may place additional evidence on record during trial with the court’s prior permission and the ED may either file a fresh complaint or proceed under Section 319.”
The Court also noted that,
“If the ED acts contrary to these directions the accused can approach the High Court.”
Finally, the Supreme Court gave the same liberty to the present petitioner, Bhupesh Baghel, and his son, and accordingly disposed of the petition.
This case highlights important legal questions on the scope of ED’s powers under the PMLA and safeguards for accused persons during investigations.
The Supreme Court’s clear guidance in this matter will have an impact on future money laundering investigations and legal procedures in India.
Case Title: Bhupesh Kumar Baghel v. Union of India and Others, W.P. (Crl.) No. 301/2025.
Read Attachment
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
