The Review Petition against the 2022 Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgment is perhaps the most significant legal development currently pending in the Supreme Court regarding the powers of the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
In Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022), the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment that fundamentally reshaped the landscape of financial crime prosecution. A three-judge bench upheld the constitutional validity of almost all the contested provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
This ruling significantly empowered the Enforcement Directorate (ED), effectively distinguishing it from the regular police and exempting it from several standard criminal procedure safeguards.
The review petition (led by Karti Chidambaram and others) challenges these "harsh" interpretations on 13 specific grounds, primarily:
ECIR Copy : ED is not required to give the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) to the accused. Violates Article 21; an accused must know the full nature of the allegations to defend themselves.
Self-Incrimination : Statements made under Section 50 are admissible in court; ED officers are not "police officers." Violates Article 20(3) (Right against self-incrimination) and the Evidence Act.
Bail (Twin Conditions) : Accused must prove they are "not guilty" at the bail stage (Section 45). Reverses the "Presumption of Innocence," making bail nearly impossible.
Money Bill : Upheld PMLA amendments made via the "Money Bill" route. Argued as unconstitutional; a criminal law cannot be amended via a fiscal budget tool.
Definition of Offense : "Possession" of crime proceeds is enough to charge someone with money laundering. Argument against it is that "projecting" the money as untainted must be a necessary ingredient (i.e., trying to make "dirty" money look "clean").
Connection to the West Bengal / I-PAC Case
The outcome of this review is directly relevant to the current ED vs. West Bengal standoff.
The West Bengal government's defense in the I-PAC raid hinges on the argument that the ED is using its "unchecked powers" to seize confidential political data.
If the Review Bench (CJI Surya Kant's bench) eventually rules that ED officers are akin to police or that procedural safeguards of the CrPC apply, it would significantly weaken the ED's current legal standing in the Bengal case.
The Supreme Court is currently deciding the "Maintainability" of the review. Since reviews have a very narrow scope (restricted to "errors apparent on the face of the record"), the ED is arguing that the petitioners are trying to re-argue the entire case. However, the bench has shown a willingness to examine at least two major issues: the non-supply of ECIR and the reversal of the burden of proof.
