In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has determined that statements made by an accused under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) while in custody for one Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) cannot be used as evidence in another ongoing ECIR. The decision was rendered by a division bench consisting of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, who underscored the inadmissibility of such statements in subsequent cases investigated by the same agency.
The court’s ruling highlights the importance of safeguarding the rights of individuals in custody, stressing that statements made while in detention are inherently unreliable due to the compromised state of mind of the accused. The bench referenced the 2022 judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, which held that confessions to police are inadmissible under Section 25 of the Evidence Act, applying a similar principle to the PMLA context.
The Supreme Court further emphasized that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot summon a person already in judicial custody without obtaining explicit permission from the court that ordered the custody. This protection is vital to ensure that the accused’s rights under Article 20(3) of the Constitution—protection against self-incrimination—are not violated.
In this case, the Court concluded that the statement given by the accused while in custody for a separate ECIR is inadmissible in the present proceedings. The ruling serves as a reminder that fair play and justice must prevail in all investigative processes, particularly in cases involving multiple investigations by the same agency.
