Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh on Tuesday told the Bombay High Court that the Special PMLA Court while granting bail to Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut along with Pravin Raut had made observation about the Enforcement Directorate as if it was dealing with Public Interest Litigation.

"No one had argued about illegal arrest and he has observed that. Then he makes observation of the conduct of the agency as if he is dealing with a Public Interest Litigation while it was no body's case about the lethargy of the officers. Who had argued that? No body pointed it out? That cannot be a ground for granting bail," ASG submitted.

He further submitted that the special court took into consideration irrelevant factors while granting bail.

"Both bail applications were allowed. The court has not taken into consideration, in fact ignored the relevant factors. A totally incorrect test has been applied for granting the bail. PMLA offences are heinous crime like murder and terrorism," ASG said. 

The high court was hearing a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate against the order of Special PMLA court granting bail to Sanjay Raut and Pravin Raut. 

ASG Anil Singh today pointed out that the judge had made observation about agency's pick and choose strategy which was not even argued by any of the parties. 

He also argued that the Special Court had taken into consideration the chargesheet filed by the Economic Offence Wing which was not party to the proceedings.

He then told the court that none of the tenants of the Patra Chawl were rehabilitated or given reconstructed building. He submitted that the FSI was sold to company called HDIL which then forwarded the money to Pravin Raut whose ultimate beneficiary was Sanjay Raut. 

The bench then questioned ASG, 

"How do you say it is proceeds of crime?

ASG responded and said all the transactions happened during the same year of 2009-2010. He added that Pravin Raut had argued before the Special Court that the money was through sale of sweat equity but as confirmed by one of the officers there were no sweat equity shares.

The high court then said that it will continue hearing the plea tomorrow and asked the ASG to submit a synopsis.

Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut and his aide Pravin Raut were granted bail by the Special PMLA Court in the Patra Chawl Scam on November 9, wherein, Special Judge MG Deshpande came down heavily on the Enforcement Directorate. The order stated,

“It appears that ED knows only S.19 and 45 of the PML Act, but forgets that there is a provision for trial of an offence under PML Act as per Sec.44 thereof."

The order further stated that the arrest of both the Rauts was illegal and the case was purely a civil dispute. The court noted, "It is clear how Pravin Raut (A3) is arrested for a pure civil litigation, whereas Sanjay Raut (A5) for no reason. This truth is glaring. The Court is under legal obligation and duty to find out truth even at the stage of bail. The Hon’ble Supreme Court time and again laid down, 'Truth is the guiding star. Criminal trial is voyage of discovery of truth. The truth alone triumphs and every endeavour has to be made by the Court to discover the truth and make justice'."

The Special Judge in the bail order said that the arrest of Sanjay Raut and Pravin Raut was part of the pick and choose strategy of the agency. "Rakesh and Sarang (A1 and A2) for their misdeeds and being the main accused persons admitted the same by affidavit of Sarang Wadhawan, but were not arrested by the ED and have been left scot-free. But at the same time Pravin Raut(A3) was arrested for civil dispute, whereas Sanjay Raut(A5) for no reason. All this clearly indicates disparity, pick and choose attitude of the ED and the Court cannot put premium on the same but legally bound to make parity," the order stated. 

Case Title: Enforcement Directorate vs Pravin Raut & Anr.