Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 · Chapter V: Summons, Searches and Seizures, Etc.
Section 19: Power to arrest
(1) If the Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director or any other officer authorised 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-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.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 14 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 19
-
Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Another
Whether in each and every case, even arising out of an offence under Penal Code, 1860 now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 would it be necessary to furnish grounds of arrest to an accused either before arrest or forthwith…
-
Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr.
The main issue canvassed by the appellant in this appeal is the violation of the appellant’s right under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India as the appellant was not informed of the grounds for his arrest.
-
Arvind Kejriwal v. Central Bureau of Investigation
The instant appeals are directed against the judgments and orders dated 05.08.2024 passed by the High Court, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to his arrest being illegal as well as his application for the grant of…
-
Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement
Validity of arrest of the appellant under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002; scope and ambit of the Courts to examine the legality of the arrest under Section 19; whether the Court while…
-
Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office
(a) Whether the complaint filed u/s.44(1)(b) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 will be governed by sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC; (b) If the accused was not arrested by the ED till the filing of the…
-
Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Whether the arrest and subsequent remand of the accused-appellant was vitiated as the copy of the remand application was not provided to him or his counsel before passing of the order of remand thus, not informing him…
-
Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement
Whether the Appellant is entitled to grant of interim bail/release during the pendency of the Appeal challenging his arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement, on account of an intervening factor i.e. 18th Lok Sabha…
-
Ram Kishor Arora v. Directorate of
Whether the action of the respondent ED in handing over the document containing the grounds of the arrest to arrestee and taking it back after obtaining the endorsement and his signature thereon, as a token of he having…
-
Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India & Ors.
Whether the arrest of the appellants u/s. 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was valid; whether there was proper compliance with s.19(1) of the Act of 2002 and as to whether the Vacation Judge/Additional…
- V. Senthil Balaji v. The State Represented by
- Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
- P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement
- Pankaj Jain v. Union of India & Anr.