New Delhi, May 13 -- The Supreme Court in a recent judgment has held that the right to fair trial of an accused facing money laundering charges cannot be taken away by "drastic" provisions such as twin conditions of bail and the burden of proof being on the accused , both of which are key provisos of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The court said that right to fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution includes the "right to defend" and said, in an order passed last week that an accused under PMLA would be entitled to the list of witnesses and documents relied by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to defend the charges and even seek bail. The decision by a three-judge bench headed by justice Abhay S Oka said, " The right to defend consists of the right to lead the defence evidence by examining the witnesses and producing the documents. Therefore, the accused is entitled to exercise his right at the stage of entering upon defence by compelling the prosecution or a third party to produce a document or a thing in their possession or custody." The court was dealing with two petitions emanating from different orders issued by the high courts of Delhi and Punjab & Haryana in 2022 and 2024 denying accused facing charges of money laundering under PMLA access of documents relied by ED while filing the complaint. In the second petition, the accused sought copies of documents and property titles seized by ED at the time of raid conducted at their premises. Allowing both appeals, the bench, also comprising justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and AG Masih said, "When the legislature has felt a need to bring out a legislation like the PMLA, it is the duty of the court to interpret Article 21 in such a way that the right of a fair trial available to the accused is not affected." The court specifically noted two provisions of PMLA - section 45(1)(ii) dealing with bail and section 24 which casts a reverse burden of proof on the accused to dispel the assumption on proceeds of crime. The bail provision under PMLA lays down twin conditions for the court to grant bail. This requires the court to be satisfied, after hearing the public prosecutor, that there are "reasonable grounds" to believe the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and that he is "not likely to commit any offence" while on bail. Section 24 states, "In any proceeding relating to proceeds of crime under this Act, in the case of a person charged with the offence of money-laundering under Section 3, the authority or court shall, unless the contrary is proved, presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering..." The court added that neither takes away the right to fair trial: "The object of the provisions of Section 24 or 45(1)(ii) is not to take away the fundamental right of fair trial conferred on the accused. These provisions are different in the sense that they put a burden on the accused." Tracing the reason for introducing such drastic provisions under PMLA, the 86-page judgment said, "The presence of modern technology has brought about new categories of crimes. This law has been enacted taking into consideration the changing needs."...