Meghalaya high court, Courthouse in Shillong, India

New Delhi [India], May 3 : The Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that the offence of money laundering has profound trans-border implications.The statement was made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta while justifying the decision of extending the tenure of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) Director.Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Centre made this submission before the bench of Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol.He said that money laundering has profound trans-border implications. He further added that flexibility is needed due to the global fight.He said the extension was for administrative reasons as it was vital for the country's evaluation by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). However, the court remarked can one person be so indispensable. The court sought to know if there was no other person in the orgsation who can do his job.Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also questioned the locus of the petition filed by political party members whose leaders are under ED investigation and said that he has serious objections against such a petition.Mehta said that their leaders are facing serious allegations and trying to pressure Enforcement Directorate. He also apprised the court about the fact that ED had to bring a cash counting machine because there was so much cash recovered from them.He said that the ED director unlike others does not function locally, but across the country and even globally due to part of the structure to tackle money laundering.The argument in the matter remained inconclusive and will be continued on Monday.The court was hearing petitions challenging the Centre decision dated November 17 2022 whereby the govt has extended the third tenure of director of Enforcement Directorate SK Mishra.In the earlier hearing, Amicus Curiae KV Vishwanathan had raised an objection on the extension of the tenure of the director of the Enforcement Directorate and submitted before the Supreme Court that the Committee failed to consider the availability and suitability of other officers before taking a decision on extension of tenure of the director of Enforcement Directorate.Amicus has said that the office order dated November 17, 2021, does not satisfy the touchstone of 'public interest' and hence it may be set aside.On the other side, the Centre in its affidavit had defended its decision to extend the tenure of the Enforcement Directorate director and said that petition challenging it is motivated and urged the top court to dismiss the plea.The Centre government submission came on an affidavit which was filed countering the submission of the petition challenging the extension of the ED director.Centre had informed the SC that the petition is clearly motivated by an oblique personal interest rather than any public interest litigations.The Centre had also said that the petition is a misuse of Article 32 of the Constitution, which is clearly being filed in a representative capacity for and on behalf of the President and the office bearers of the Indian National Congress, who are being investigated by ED and are otherwise fully competent to approach respective courts for appropriate statutory relief and remedy under the Code of Criminal Procedure.Centre had said the petition has been filed for espousing the cause of her political masters when there is nothing barring the concerned persons who are under investigation from approaching the competent court for any appropriate relief.One of the petitions was filed by the General Secretary of the Madhya Pradesh Mahila Congress Committee Jaya Thakur through advocate Varun Thakur and advocate Shashank Ratnoo.The petitioner Jaya Thakur has said the extension has been granted despite the matter being subjudice and initial adverse order against the respondent ED Director SK Mishra in another petition filed by activist Dr Jaya Thakur in the Supreme Court of India.The petitioner has challenged the Centre decision dated November 17, 2022, whereby the govt has extended the third tenure of the director of Enforcement Directorate SK Mishra. Earlier the petitioner has also challenged the extension order dated November 17, 2021.The petitioner said that democracy is a part of the basic structure of our Constitution and the rule of law and free and fair elections are basic features of democracy."The respondents destroyed the basic structure of democracy by misusing the enforcement agencies against the political opponent. The Supreme Court in a number of the cases held that appointment in Enforcement Agencies must be fair and transparent manners if their appointment will be done in biased nature, then they can be used as tools," the petition said.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

Meghalaya High CourtFOLLOW

Meghalaya high court, Latest News

New Delhi [India], May 3 : A virtual conference on the topic "Collaborations" was orgsed by the Department of ... ...

Udupi (Karnataka) [India], May 3 : Karnataka BJP leader Yashpal Suvarna said that Bajrang Dal works for the development ... ...

Jammu (Jammu and Kashmir) [India], May 3 : Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy (DSEL), Union Ministry of ... ...

Ballia (Uttar Pradesh) [India], May 3 : Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Wednesday said that every citizen ... ...

Bhubaneswar (Odisha) [India], May 3 : Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik on Wednesday approved the proposal of increasing the ... ...

New Delhi, May 3 The Supreme Court on Wednesday shot a volley of questions at the Centre in ... ...

New Delhi [India], May 3 : The newly constituted Scientific Committee of Food Safety and Standards Authority of India ... ...

New Delhi [India], May 3 : The Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that the offence of money ... ...