Summary: India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, effective November 13, 2025, have fundamentally transformed the regulatory landscape for internal investigations. This analysis is the first part in a two-part series examining the critical compliance challenges facing organisations and law firms navigating data-sensitive proceedings under the new regime.Continue Reading Implications Of The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025: Stoking Internal Investigations – Part I
Summary: The article highlights the powers of statutory auditors following the recent judgment, clarifying that statutory auditors cannot be held liable for money laundering solely because of lack of due diligence or negligence. The article also emphasises that criminal liability under PMLA requires clear evidence of collusion and that auditors are not expected to probe beyond their professional auditing role.Continue Reading Absence of Due Diligence Not Money Laundering
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”), was enacted to inter alia provide a consolidated framework to resolve insolvency in a time-bound manner and to maximise the value of assets. This objective is further aided by a moratorium under Section 14 that halts legal proceedings against the corporate debtor, and the immunity provision under Section 32A, which offers a fresh slate to resolution applicants upon plan approval.Continue Reading IBC vs. PMLA: Supreme Court Reinforces Jurisdictional Boundaries in Kalyani Transco Case
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”), places proceeds of crime at the core of the offence of money laundering. Before delving into this article, it is imperative to understand the definition of proceeds of crime, which Section 2 (1) (u) of the PMLA[1] defines as “any property derived or obtained by any person, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence”.Continue Reading Changing Landscape of Arrest Under the PMLA – Decoding Section 19 Through Jurisprudence
Securing bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA“), is challenging due to the high threshold for bail stipulated by the Act. Section 45 of the PMLA stipulates that bail may be granted to an accused in a money laundering case only if two conditions are met: first, the Public Prosecutor must be given the opportunity to oppose the bail application; second, there must be prima facie satisfaction that the accused has not committed the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It is frequently contended that these twin conditions pose a significant challenge to the prevailing legal principle in criminal jurisprudence that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception”. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the twin conditions challenge an accused’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution[1].Continue Reading Renewed focus on Liberty – Delhi High Court upholds Constitutional Safeguards on Bail under PMLA
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”), is a comprehensive law, dealing with aspects of money-laundering, attachment of proceeds of crime, adjudication, and confiscation thereof. The “proceeds of crime” is the fulcrum of the offence of money-laundering under the PMLA and all actions taken by the Enforcement Directorate (“ED”) under the PMLA invariably revolve around it. Accordingly, the definition of proceeds of crime under Section 2(1)(u) of the PMLA is of immense relevance. In terms of Section 2(1)(u) of the PMLA, “any property derived or obtained… by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence…” is regarded as proceeds of crime. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.[1] (“Vijay Madanlal”), the expression “derived or obtained” is indicative of a criminal activity, relating to a scheduled offence, already accomplished. The commission of a scheduled offense, whether registered with the jurisdictional police or under review by a competent forum through a complaint, constitutes the legal basis for any investigation conducted under the PMLA.Continue Reading Shifting Paradigms in PMLA Jurisprudence: Madras High Court reopens settled principles of Automatic Quashing of PMLA Proceedings
A recent decision rendered by the Madras High Court in S. Srinivasan v. The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai[1], has held that being in possession of the proceeds of crime and claiming it to be untainted property can independently be perceived as money laundering under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”).
Although the said decision is in line with the principles previously enunciated by various courts while interpreting the PMLA provisions, such a simple interpretation may possibly lead to unintended situations. The primary reason being that anyone who is merely in possession of proceeds of crime without any genuine knowledge or any involvement therein can be prosecuted under PMLA. This perspective may prove to be counterproductive to the principle of presumption of innocence in criminal law.Continue Reading Is mere possession of proceeds of crime sufficient for trigerring PMLA?
A single judge bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi delivered a significant ruling in the matter of Adnan Nisar v. Directorate of Enforcement and other connected matters[1], on September 17, 2024, holding that an offence committed in a foreign country can be classified as Predicate Offence, under the Prevention of
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) has held that preventing and detecting fraud or market abuse is a key pillar of investor protection. Consequently, SEBI has been relentless in introducing and amending rules, regulations, and circulars to regulate practices tantamount to fraud or market abuse.Continue Reading Obligations placed on stockbrokers to curb fraud and money laundering
As sanctions regimes become highly objective oriented, the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) is focused on ensuring enforcement and targeting entities involved in violating the sanctions, irrespective of their nationality. The inherent complexity, supplemented by an objective-focused approach, makes sanctions compliance even more important in today’s geopolitical climate. On June 12, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) unveiled a comprehensive set of anti-money laundering measures aimed at enhancing transparency and preventing illicit financial activities. These measures, along with the OFAC advisory, bring significant implications for financial institutions worldwide by expanding grounds for imposing sanctions against Foreign Financial Institutions (FFIs) and limiting the provision of certain software technologies to Russia.[1]Continue Reading Navigating OFAC Sanctions: Insights for Indian Businesses and Banks