Why did the Supreme Court insult ED so much, not even 1 case was found guilty in Congress rule and only 40 cases were found in BJP rule?

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has once again slammed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a case. Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjwal Bhuyan expressed concern over the low conviction rate of ED and said what will happen if the accused is not convicted? How long might someone have to wait for a trial?
While hearing the bail plea of ​​former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee, the bench of Justice Ujjwal Bhuyan and Justice Surya Kant raised questions on the ED arrests. While hearing the petition of Chatterjee, who was in jail for two years in a money laundering case, the court made these important comments on keeping him/her in custody without trial for a long time. Let us know what has been the conviction rate since the Enforcement Directorate came into force in 2005 till 2024 and where does the agency go wrong during the hearing in the court.

When the Supreme Court told the agency to pay attention to the evidence

In August this year, the Supreme Court had asked the ED to focus on quality prosecution and evidence, citing low conviction rate in money laundering cases. Hearing the bail plea of ​​a Chhattisgarh businessman accused of money laundering, a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Dutta and Ujjwal Bhuyan said that the ED should conduct scientific investigation to increase the conviction rate.

5,297 cases registered under PMLA, convicted in only 40

Earlier, on August 6 this year, the Central Government had informed the Lok Sabha that a total of 5,297 cases were registered under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) from 2014 to 2024, while only 40 cases resulted in conviction and 3 were acquitted. Minister of State for Home Nityanand Rai gave this information in response to a question by AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi.

Need to understand what the bench had said then

According to Delhi based advocate and legal expert Shivaji Shukla, the Supreme Court had made a big comment regarding ED in August. he/she told the ED that you need to focus more on prosecution and quality of evidence. In any cases where you feel that a prima facie case is made out, you need to establish it in the court.

Verbal evidence has no meaning, scientific investigation is necessary

According to Shivaji Shukla, the Supreme Court has considered the statements and affidavits of some witnesses from ED as oral evidence and has said that such oral evidence is God’s trust. Tomorrow will the witness stand by his/her statement or retract it. In such a situation, you should do scientific investigation first.

Government attached or confiscated assets worth Rs 1.4 lakh crore

Earlier, on behalf of the government, Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Choudhary had informed that the agency has registered 7,083 cases under PMLA till July, 2024 and till now has attached or seized assets worth more than Rs 1.4 lakh crore.

132 cases related to politicians, punishment in only 1

Of these, 132 are registered against politicians i.e. former MPs, MLAs, MLCs and other political leaders or anyone associated with political parties. According to the government, the maximum of 34 such cases (against politicians) were registered in 2022. After this, 28 cases were registered in 2020 and 26-26 cases in 2021 and 2023. Of these, only 5 cases were completed and one resulted in conviction in 2020.

No one was convicted during UPA regime

ED data shows that the central probe agency arrested 2,500 percent more people in the last decade. At the same time, 63 persons were convicted in money laundering cases, while no one was convicted under the previous Congress-led UPA government.

1,797 cases registered in UPA and 5,155 cases registered in NDA

The ED registered 1,797 money laundering cases under PMLA during the rule of the UPA government, while 5,155 such cases were initiated during the NDA rule. Chargesheets are filed when the agency completes its investigation into a case and prima facie establishes charges against an individual or group. The ED registered 1,281 such complaints under the NDA, while only 102 under the UPA.

84 investigations in UPA and 7,300 investigations in NDA

Meanwhile, the investigating agency conducted 7,300 searches between 2014-2024 compared to 84 between 2005-2014. The number of people arrested saw a huge jump from 29 to 755. The UPA government did not see any seizure of assets, while the agency had seized assets worth Rs 15,710 crore in the last decade.

How true is this claim of ED?

The ED claims that only 2.98 per cent of its total cases are against sitting or former MPs and MLAs, while its conviction rate under the anti-money laundering law is as high as 96 per cent. However, according to government data, ED’s claim does not hold water. Out of 132 cases, only 1 resulted in conviction.

5 thousand cases registered in 17 years, only 992 reached court, only 23 convicted

In 2022, the Finance Ministry had told Parliament that the ED had registered 5,422 cases under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act), 2002 in the last 17 years. It had filed chargesheets in the court in 992 cases, but convicted the accused in only 23 cases. Actually, this law was made in 2002, but it came into force only in 2005.

Opposition leaders on target of ED during NDA era

ED is investigating cases related to 121 big politicians between 2014 and 2022. Of these, 115 leaders are from opposition parties i.e. 95 percent of the cases are against opposition leaders. At the same time, ED investigated 26 leaders in the ten years of UPA from 2004 to 2014. Of these, 14 leaders were from opposition parties.

Why is ED’s conviction rate so low, where does the mistake occur?

According to Shivaji Shukla, when any investigating agency is used politically, it is obvious that there will be lack of evidence in it. Even if the agency gets an edge in the media trial, its claims often get rejected in the court. Two things should be important regarding the case. Firstly, strong evidence to establish the case. Second, to present your investigation correctly in the court. Many times the cases of the agencies die in the court and they have to feel embarrassed. This is the reason why their conviction rate is very low.

Section 45 of PMLA, which increases the power of ED

According to Advocate Shivaji Shukla, the double conditions of bail under Section 45 of PMLA are very strict for an accused. A person must prove in court that he/she is prima facie innocent of the crime. Secondly, the accused should convince the judge that he/she will not commit any crime while on bail. The burden of proof lies entirely on the accused in jail, who is often unable to fight the government. Both these circumstances make it almost impossible for an accused to get bail under PMLA. For this reason, the power of ED used to be unlimited. Justices Rohinton Nariman and SK. Kaul’s bench had in November 2017 struck down Section 45(1) of the PMLA, which added two additional conditions for bail, terming it arbitrary.