TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

The PMLA paradox

Rising cases, dismal conviction rate
The Supreme Court has also weighed in, urging the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to focus on quality prosecution and scientific investigation. - File photo

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

OVER the past decade, India has witnessed a staggering rise in cases registered under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), with nearly 5,300 cases reported between 2014 and 2024. However, this surge in cases contrasts sharply with the dismal conviction rate — only in 40 cases in 10 years. This troubling disparity calls into question the effectiveness of the enforcement mechanism, raising concerns about the quality of investigations and the use of this powerful legal tool. The 2019 amendment to the PMLA, which significantly expanded the scope of what constitutes a ‘proceeds of crime’, has been a turning point. While intended to strengthen the fight against money-laundering, the amendment has led to an exponential increase in cases, often involving high-profile political figures. This has sparked allegations that the PMLA is being weaponised for political purposes rather than serving its intended aim of curbing financial crimes. The others charged under the PMLA include business leaders, bureaucrats and even farmers, highlighting the law’s expansive reach and controversial application.

Advertisement

The Supreme Court has also weighed in, urging the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to focus on quality prosecution and scientific investigation. The low conviction rate suggests that cases may be pursued without sufficient evidence, leading to prolonged detentions and trials that yield little in terms of justice. The court’s recent emphasis on safeguarding the rights of the accused underlines the need for a more balanced approach — one that ensures the guilty are punished, while protecting individuals from unjust persecution.

Advertisement

As the ED continues to expand its reach, it must heed these judicial admonitions and prioritise fair and rigorous investigations. A failure to do so risks undermining public confidence in the legal system and turning the PMLA into a tool of political vendetta rather than a robust framework for fighting financial crime.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement