'Concerned over ED's image, it cannot act like a crook': Supreme Court flags low conviction rates by agency

The top court is hearing pleas seeking review of the 2022 verdict that upheld powers of arrest of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday rebuked the Enforcement Directorate, saying it cannot act like a crook and its conduct must be within the four corners of the law.

Hearing a batch of review petitions challenging the PMLA 2022 verdict, a three-judge bench led by Justice Surya Kant said, "You cannot act like a crook. You have to work within the four corners of law. There is a difference between law-enforcing authorities and law-violating bodies."

The bench, also comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh, also slammed the ED for its very low convictions.

Quoting what a minister said in Parliament, the bench asked, "After 5,000 cases, less than 10 convictions. Why? We are equally concerned about the image of the ED."

The court was hearing the arguments on the maintainability of a batch of review petitions -- filed by Karti P Chidambaram and others -- challenging the correctness of the 2022 Vijay Madanalal Chaudhary judgment which upheld various PMLA provisions.

The court said that it was concerned about the agency's image and that there is a difference between law-enforcement agencies and those who violate it.

Replying to the top courts questions, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, appearing for the ED, submitted that one of the reasons for the low conviction rate in PMLA cases is that the "rich and powerful use a powerful battery of lawyers and file so many applications".

He added that these accused do not even allow the trial to take place and delay it.

Raju sought rejection of the pleas because those are, in effect, appeals disguised as reviews.

"If the review is accepted, it would be tantamount to rewriting the judgment of Vijay Madanlal, which cannot be permitted," he said.

He maintained that there was no ground made out by the petitioners to seek a review of the 2022 ruling.

The Supreme Court on July 31 said it would first hear the arguments on the issue of maintainability of these petitions seeking a review of its July 2022 verdict.