Supreme Court defers hearing in batch of plea's concerning contours of powers of Enforcement Directorate to October 20
The top court on Tuesday made it clear that adjournment won't be given on any grounds including on the basis of non-availability of senior counsels.
A bench headed by Justice Khanwilkar today deferred the final hearing of the batch of petitions pertaining to the powers of Enforcement Directorate (ED) to October 20th, after one of the petitioner, Karti Chidambaram sought adjournment. A decision on the petitions are expected to define contours of powers of ED to investigate, issuance of summons, carrying out arrests among others.
The bench also comprising of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C.T.Ravi Kumar made it clear that non-availability of senior counsels will not be a ground for any further adjournment. While passing the said order Justice Khanwilkar remarked that this matter is of great importance as all the courts are involved in these proceedings as many petitions are being filed and hence it should be heard as early as possible.
The bench made it clear that it will not grant any indulgence to any parties trying to defer the hearing henceforth.
This batch of petitions comprises of many high profile case including that of Karti Chidambaram’s INX media case, Akali Dal minister Sarwan Phillaur's corruption case, e-Tender scam in Madhya Pradesh as well as the money laundering charges against diamond trader Ritesh Jain and others. The most recent case pertaining to the issue is that of former Home Minister of Maharashtra, Anil Deshmukh, who moved the Supreme Court on a Sunday seeking protection from any coercive action in a money laundering case, after issuance of fresh summons demanding his presence on 05.07.202 by the ED.
The larger issue surrounding the above batch of petitions among is concerned with the interpretation of Prevention of Money Laundering Act as well, the issue is said to be pending before the Supreme Court since 2014.
On the last date of hearing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pointed out that out of the 200 odd case cases, 82 cases were specifically by persons facing prosecution under PMLA, while 17 were under Companies Act and 27 under the Customs Act.