The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed the petitions moved by Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee and his wife Rujira against the summons issued to them to appear in the national capital in a money-laundering investigation linked to an alleged coal scam in West Bengal.
Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar dismissed the petitions on Friday and said, "Considering the very nature of PMLA, a meaningful reading of section 4 and 5 of CrPC r/w section 65 and 71 of PMLA, it evident that section 160 will have no application as the field is occupied by Section 50 of the PMLA."
"In light of the above, the challenge of the Petitioners to the impugned notices /summons fails. The petition is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. All pending applications (if any) are disposed of," said the orders.
The High Court had earlier kept the order reserved after hearing the submissions by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal for the petitioners
Rujira Banerjee's petition challenging the ED complaint filed in the case, the trial court order taking cognizance of that complaint and the subsequent issuance of a summons for physical appearance will be heard on February 11, 2021, the bench said.
The petitioners alleged that they have serious apprehensions about the fairness of the investigation being conducted by the ED owing to the fact that the respondent is adopting a pick and choose the attitude with respect to certain persons and is giving undue benefit and protection to complicit individuals and in return extracting false, baseless and malicious statements from them.
SG Mehta argued that the jurisdiction of ED probe was "not confined to one area, police station or State" as the offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) often have "cross border implications".
"The concept of local jurisdiction, the concept of the police station, an officer in charge of the police station is avoided by the legislature while enacting PMLA. It is clear from section 71," he said.
"This is a very peculiar type of offence in which money was transferred to Delhi and thereafter to Bangkok. The subject matter of the crime has also travelled to Delhi. It can't be now said that I can't be called to Delhi," SG Mehta stated.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal earlier told the Delhi High Court that there is an embargo regarding the petitioner's wife. She has to be interrogated at her residence, Sibal said adding that a woman, a disabled person, a child should be investigated only where they reside and they can't be called to Delhi.
Enforcement Directorate, earlier told the Delhi HC that there is a difference between probes in offences dealing with provisions of PMLA and IPC and in IPC offences, there are police stations that have jurisdiction, however, in PMLA there is no such territorial jurisdiction.
Petitioner Abhishek Banerjee along with his wife Rujira Banerjee sought the issuance of direction to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to not summon them in New Delhi and carry out any further examination in Kolkata, West Bengal.
The petition stated that the petitioner Abhishek Banerjee, is a politician hailing from the state of West Bengal and is presently serving as a Member of Parliament in the Lok Sabha, having been elected from the Diamond Harbour, South 24 Parganas constituency in West Bengal and hence is a respected individual and a prominent member of the Indian polity and society. He has two minor children under her care, said the plea.
( With inputs from ANI )
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor