Section 19 of the PML Act reads:
Power to Arrest – (1) If the Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director or any other officer authorized in this behalf by the Central Government by general or special order, has on the basis of material in his possession, reason to believe (the reason for such belief to be recorded in writing) that any person has been guilty of an offence punishable under this Act, he may arrest such person and shall, as soon as may be, inform him of the grounds for such arrest.
(2) The Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director or any other officer shall, immediately after arrest of such person under sub[1]section (1), forward a copy of the order along with the material in his possession, referred to in that sub-section, to the Adjudicating Authority, in a sealed envelope, in the manner as may be prescribed and such Adjudicating Authority shall keep such order and material for such period, as may be prescribed.
(3) Every person arrested under sub-section (1) shall, within twenty-four hours, be taken to a Special Court or Judicial Magistrate or a Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, having jurisdiction:
Provided that the period of twenty-four hours shall exclude the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Special Court or Magistrate’s Court.
A bare reading of the section reflects that while the legislature has given power to the Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director, or an authorized officer to arrest a person, it is fenced with preconditions and requirements, which must be satisfied prior to the arrest of a person. The conditions are – The officer must have material in his possession. On the basis of such material, the authorized officer should form and record in writing, “reasons to believe” that the person to be arrested, is guilty of an offence punishable under the PML Act. The person arrested, as soon as may be, must be informed of the grounds of arrest. These preconditions act as stringent safeguards to protect life and liberty of individuals”.
Section 19 includes inbuilt checks that designated officers must adhere to:-
First, the “reasons to believe” of the alleged involvement of the arrestee have to be recorded in writing, that the person being arrested is guilty of the offence punishable under the PML Act. It is mandatory to record the “reasons to believe” to arrive at the opinion that the arrestee is guilty of the offence, and to furnish the reasons to the arrestee. This ensures an element of fairness and accountability.
Secondly, while affecting the arrest, the reasons shall be furnished to the arrestee. Article 22(1) of the Constitution provides, inter alia, that no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest. This being the fundamental right guaranteed to the arrested person, the mode of conveying information of the grounds of arrest must necessarily be meaningful so as to serve the intended purpose. The right to be informed about the grounds of arrest flows from Article 22(1) of the Constitution and any infringement of this fundamental right vitiates the process of arrest and remand.
Lastly, a copy of the order of arrest along with the material in possession has to be forwarded to the safe custody of the adjudicating authority. This ensures fairness, objectivity and accountability of the designated officer while forming their opinion, regarding the involvement of the arrestee in the offence of money laundering.
The Court explained that Section 19(1) of the PML Act is meant to serve a higher purpose, and also to enforce the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution. The right to life and personal liberty is sacrosanct, a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 and protected by Articles 20 and 22 of the Constitution.