A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine Masih observed that “ED should remember that there is something called Art 21”. Supreme court on Monday (21 october) came down on the agency for violating the rights of people under custody and the way ED is implementing acts like PMLA (Preveniton of Money Laundering Act).
The apex court was hearing a matter concerning the two bearucrats namely IAS Anil Tuteja and Alok Shukla who are accused in Chattisgarh’s Nagrik Apurti Nigam Scam. These two also allegedly colluded with the High Couer Judge who granted them bail and even took the help of the then Advocate General. The court took into consideration that while Tuteja was being interrogated by the Anti Curroption Beureu, ED summoned him and when Tuteja could not appear before ED, then a second summon was issued.
The ASG appearing for the ED said that he appeared before the ACB voluntarily to which the court refuted and asked the ASG “Show us how they came voluntarily. Why should ACB officers accompany them to ED? Please explain to us this procedure. He is in the ACB office when ED issues summons at 12 noon and then at 5.30pm. Why is this tearing hurry?”
The bench also observed “If you knew that he was being interrogated in the ACB office, why was the time of 12.30 given? What was the hurry to issue summonses two times when you knew that he was being interrogated by the ACB? This doesn’t happen (even) in the case of terrorism or serious offences in the IPC,”
During the end of the proceedings the bench noticed “that judges are also human beings and they see every day the way in which PMLA law is being implemented, perhaps hinting at recent verdicts of the apex court through which some stringent provisions of the anti money laundering law had been diluted”
Comments