Delhi HC refuses to entertain Jairam Ramesh challenge to PMLA amendments

The Delhi High Court today refused to entertain the petition filed by Congress Leader and Rajya Sabha MP Jairam Ramesh, challenging the amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) through the Finance Acts of 2015, 2016 and 2018..The amendments were brought via Sections 145 to 151 of the Finance Act 2015, Section 232 of the Finance Act 2016, and Section 208 of the Finance Act 2018..The order was pronounced by a Division Bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and V Kameswar Rao..Dismissing the petition, the Court has stated,.“We do not think that it is a case where this Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”.Reiterating its objection on the delay in challenging the amendment, the Court has observed,.“…there is no dispute that the petitioner herein is a Member of Rajya Sabha. The plea of Mr. Chidambaram that the petitioner was not aware that such amendments have been carried out as Money Bills, is no reason to challenge the amendments, at least of the years 2015 and 2016 in the year 2019. In any case, merely because the petitioner came to know recently that such amendments have been carried out as Money Bills, would not justify the delay.”.After hearing Senior Advocate P Chidambaram, who appeared on behalf of Jairam Ramesh, and ASG Maninder Acharya at length, the Bench had yesterday deferred issuing notice after the maintainablity of the petition was challenged by the Centre..Jairam Ramesh had asserted that the amendments are in violation of Article 110 (1) of the Constitution of India, as they have absolutely no nexus to money bill provisions..Chidambaram had argued that PMLA was amended thrice using the Finance Act as a “cloak”..The petition filed through Advocates Muhammad Khan, Abishek Jebraj and Vikramaditya Singh had alleged that the passage of the amendments through the Finance Acts illegally stripped the Rajya Sabha of its constitutional legislative authority..ASG Acharya, on the other hand, challenged the locus of the petitioner and contended that the vires of an Act could only be challenged by an affected party..Through the 2015 Finance Act, the definition of “proceeds of crime” was expanded and the Deputy Director was empowered to attach property. The power of the Adjudicating Authority was also transferred to Special Courts..Further, the Appellate Tribunal established under Section 25 of PMLA was replaced by the Appellate Tribunal constituted under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976, and the structure of the Appellate Authority was also modified..The 2018 Finance Act also brought in amendments to the criminal procedure under the PMLA to enhance its effectiveness..Read the order: