Take the pledge to vote

For a better tommorow#AajSawaroApnaKal
  • I agree to receive emails from News18

  • I promise to vote in this year's elections no matter what the odds are.
  • Please check above checkbox.

    SUBMIT

Thank you for
taking the pledge

Vote responsibly as each vote counts
and makes a diffrence

Disclaimer:

Issued in public interest by HDFC Life. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) (“HDFC Life”). CIN: L65110MH2000PLC128245, IRDAI Reg. No. 101 . The name/letters "HDFC" in the name/logo of the company belongs to Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited ("HDFC Limited") and is used by HDFC Life under an agreement entered into with HDFC Limited. ARN EU/04/19/13618
LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
News18 English
News18 » India
1-min read

Jairam Ramesh in HC Against Amendments in PMLA Through Money Bills

Senior advocate P Chidambaram and advocate Abhishek Jebraj, appearing for Jairam Ramesh, told the court that the amendments made to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were 'unconstitutional' and 'illegal' as they have no relation to the money bill provisions enumerated in Article 110 of the Constitution.

PTI

Updated:February 27, 2019, 6:08 PM IST
facebookTwitterskypewhatsapp
Jairam Ramesh in HC Against Amendments in PMLA Through Money Bills
File photo of Jairam Ramesh. (Image: Reuters)
Loading...

New Delhi: Congress MP Jairam Ramesh Wednesday challenged in the Delhi High Court the amendments made to the anti-money laundering law since 2015 saying that was done in violation of the Constitution as they were enacted as money bills.

In his petition, which was listed for hearing before a bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice V K Rao, the Rajya Sabha MP said that prior to the present regime at the Centre such amendments were part of an ordinary bill.

A money bill is a piece of legislation which can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha cannot amend or reject it. The Upper House can only make recommendations which may or may not be accepted by the Lower House.

The bench reserved its verdict after hearing arguments on behalf of the Congress leader and the Centre.

Senior advocate P Chidambaram and advocate Abhishek Jebraj, appearing for the Congress leader, told the court that the amendments made to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were "unconstitutional" and "illegal" as they have no relation to the money bill provisions enumerated in Article 110 of the Constitution.

"Passing the impugned amendments by way of a Money Bill is grossly illegal and is expressly ultra vires the Constitution of India. Such action bypasses the authority of the Upper House and is a desecration of bicameralism which forms an invaluable part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the petition has said.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Maninder Acharya and central government's standing counsel Amit Mahajan questioned the locus of Ramesh to challenge the amendments and asked whether he has moved the petition on account of persons who have been accused of money laundering.

They said Ramesh was in no way affected by the amendments to the PMLA and a person affected ought to have moved the court.

The government lawyers also said that there was no public interest in the matter. The bench after hearing both the sides, said, "We will consider it."

Get the best of News18 delivered to your inbox - subscribe to News18 Daybreak. Follow News18.com on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, TikTok and on YouTube, and stay in the know with what's happening in the world around you – in real time.

Read full article
Loading...
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch

facebookTwitterskypewhatsapp

Live TV

Countdown To Elections Results
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results