Relief for Congress leader DK Shivakumar, as SC dismisses money laundering case against him

The Supreme Court’s decision today brought significant relief to Karnataka’s Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar as it dismissed a 2018 money laundering case against the Congress leader. Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials arrested the Congress leader in September 2019 in connection with this case, but the Delhi High Court granted him bail the following month. Mr. […]

DK Shivakumar
by Manish Raj Malik - March 5, 2024, 2:43 pm

The Supreme Court’s decision today brought significant relief to Karnataka’s Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar as it dismissed a 2018 money laundering case against the Congress leader. Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials arrested the Congress leader in September 2019 in connection with this case, but the Delhi High Court granted him bail the following month.

Mr. Shivakumar accused the BJP of political vendetta at the time and expressed his trust in the judiciary. The ED’s investigation stemmed from Income Tax department raids on properties associated with the Congress leader and his associates in 2017, during which cash totaling nearly ₹300 crore was reportedly seized. Mr. Shivakumar countered by alleging that the cash was linked to the BJP.

The court said, “Question of whether 120B IPC can constitute a predicate standalone offence to enable ED to invoke PMLA has already been decided by the Supreme Court.”

In November of the preceding year, the apex court decided that criminal conspiracy, as outlined in Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, would be considered a scheduled offense under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act only if the purported conspiracy aims to commit an offense listed in the Act’s Schedule. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has requested a reconsideration of this decision.

Today, the court stated that the agency has the option to revisit today’s order if the ED’s request for review is granted. In 2019, Mr. Shivakumar sought to have the summonses issued by the ED dismissed, first at the Karnataka High Court, and then at the Supreme Court after finding no relief there.