LIJDLR

Enforcement Directorate

THE CLEAN SLATE IN A CONTAMINATED ESTATE: RESOLVING THE STRUCTURAL CONFLICT BETWEEN SECTION 32A OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE AND THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE’S ATTACHMENT POWERS UNDER THE PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT

Volume IV Issue I /

THE CLEAN SLATE IN A CONTAMINATED ESTATE: RESOLVING THE STRUCTURAL CONFLICT BETWEEN SECTION 32A OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE AND THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE’S ATTACHMENT POWERS UNDER THE PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT Tahura Wasif, Student, 8th semester, B.A.LL.B (H) at Amity University Jharkhand (India) Kriti Kumari, Student, 8th semester, B.A.LL.B (H) at Amity University Jharkhand (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.63 The insertion of Section 32A into the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) established the “Clean Slate” doctrine, aiming to immunize successfully resolved corporate debtors from prior criminal liabilities. However, this commercial imperative frequently collides with the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) independent mandate to attach “proceeds of crime” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Despite the doctrine’s constitutional validation in Manish Kumar v. Union of India, recent flashpoints most notably the Kalyani Transco saga and Supreme Court observations in early 2026 demonstrate that judicial policy prioritizing resolution speed cannot permanently override a competing executive statutory framework. Furthermore, while the IBC (Amendment) Bill, 2025 rationalizes the waterfall priority of standard statutory dues, it leaves the PMLA threshold attachment problem completely unaddressed, resulting in continued bid suppression and structural value destruction. Drawing on comparative jurisprudence from U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy and the UK Insolvency Act, this paper proposes a targeted legislative intervention: the enactment of Section 32A(3). This proposed mechanism mandates pre-approval consultation and escrow safeguards, structurally harmonizing the state’s anti-money laundering enforcement with the IBC’s core objective of value maximization.

THE CLEAN SLATE IN A CONTAMINATED ESTATE: RESOLVING THE STRUCTURAL CONFLICT BETWEEN SECTION 32A OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE AND THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE’S ATTACHMENT POWERS UNDER THE PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT Read More »

ECONOMIC OFFENCE ENFORCEMENT AND JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT IN INDIA: EXAMINING THE ROLE OF THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

Volume III Issue IV /

ECONOMIC OFFENCE ENFORCEMENT AND JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT IN INDIA: EXAMINING THE ROLE OF THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE Dr. Sakshi, PhD from Central University of Haryana (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.193 The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has emerged as one of India’s most powerful financial crime investigation agencies, especially under the framework of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). While the ED’s mandate includes tackling sophisticated economic offences, its aggressive rise since 2014 has triggered serious debate regarding its operational transparency, constitutional legitimacy, and political neutrality. This paper examines whether the ED is fulfilling its intended role as a financial watchdog or functioning increasingly as a political weapon. Relying on official data, recent court rulings, and media investigations, the paper highlights key patterns in enforcement trends, including a sharp surge in cases against political opposition figures, low conviction rates under PMLA, and controversial amendments passed through Money Bills. It also reviews high-profile cases such as the INX Media scandal, the ongoing challenges before the Supreme Court in Karti P. Chidambaram v. ED, and the ED Kochi Unit bribery case involving Assistant Director Shekhar Kumar. Comparative insights are drawn from international best practices to assess institutional accountability. The paper concludes with recommendations for reforming the ED’s framework to align with principles of fairness, transparency, and federalism, thereby preventing its misuse and restoring public confidence in India’s anti-corruption apparatus.

ECONOMIC OFFENCE ENFORCEMENT AND JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT IN INDIA: EXAMINING THE ROLE OF THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE Read More »

ROUND TRIPPING UNDER THE GRAB OF OVERSEAS DIRECT INVESTMENT (ODI): A LEGAL AND REGULATORY ANALYSIS

Volume III Issue I /

ROUND TRIPPING UNDER THE GRAB OF OVERSEAS DIRECT INVESTMENT (ODI): A LEGAL AND REGULATORY ANALYSIS Vidushi Dubey, 10th Semester, B.A.LL.B Student at Amity Law School, Amity University, Uttar Pradesh Dr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Assistant Professor at Amity Law School, Amity University, Uttar Pradesh Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2024.v03.22 This research paper examines the phenomenon of round tripping under the guise of Overseas Direct Investment (ODI) from India, analyzing its legal and regulatory implications. Round tripping involves the circular movement of domestic funds that exit India and return disguised as foreign investment to exploit regulatory arbitrage opportunities and preferential treatment accorded to foreign capital. The paper scrutinizes the evolving regulatory framework under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, and related notifications that govern ODI. It evaluates landmark enforcement actions by the Enforcement Directorate and dissects high-profile case studies involving corporate entities. Through comparative analysis of international regulatory approaches from jurisdictions including the United States, European Union, and China, the paper identifies best practices for addressing round tripping concerns. Despite significant regulatory enhancements, persistent challenges include beneficial ownership transparency, valuation manipulation, and emerging digital pathways for round tripping. The research proposes comprehensive reforms including a unified regulatory framework, enhanced beneficial ownership disclosure requirements, blockchain-based transaction monitoring, and strengthened international cooperation mechanisms. The paper concludes that effective regulation requires balancing legitimate business expansion needs with robust safeguards against regulatory circumvention through a substance-over-form approach to cross-border investment structures. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume III, Issue I, Page 482-513. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. © Authors, 2024

ROUND TRIPPING UNDER THE GRAB OF OVERSEAS DIRECT INVESTMENT (ODI): A LEGAL AND REGULATORY ANALYSIS Read More »