Supreme Court Hemant Soren ED Summons : Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi, expressed reluctance to entertain it. During the hearing, the bench questioned why Soren had not initially approached the Jharkhand High Court, which holds jurisdiction in this case.
New Delhi, 18 September (City Times): Supreme Court Hemant Soren ED Summons: In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has declined to entertain the plea filed by Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren challenging the summons issued to him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case. Instead, the court has directed him to first approach the Jharkhand High Court regarding this matter.
Soren’s Withdrawal as SC Suggests High Court Approach
Chief Minister Soren decided to withdraw his plea after the bench, comprised of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi, expressed reluctance to entertain it. During the hearing, the bench questioned why Soren had not initially approached the Jharkhand High Court, which holds jurisdiction in this case.
Advocate Mukul Rohatgi Represents Soren
Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Hemant Soren, acknowledged that they could indeed approach the High Court. However, he argued that there were related issues pending before the Supreme Court. Rohatgi emphasized that this case amounted to a “complete witchhunt.”
This development underscores the significance of approaching the appropriate legal forum, which, in this case, is the Jharkhand High Court, given the jurisdiction of the matter. It also emphasizes the ongoing legal complexities surrounding the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate to the Jharkhand Chief Minister, with the ED alleging money laundering.
The Background: Money Laundering Case and ED Summons
The case revolves around a money laundering investigation concerning the fraudulent sale of land parcels in Ranchi. The Enforcement Directorate had issued summonses to Chief Minister Hemant Soren, requiring him to appear for questioning regarding this matter. Notably, Soren had already filed an application challenging the earlier summonses.
Supreme Court’s Query: Why Not Approach the High Court First?
During the hearing, the bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi raised a crucial question: why had Hemant Soren not sought relief from the Jharkhand High Court in the first place, given that it holds jurisdiction over the matter?
Legal Arguments: Constitutionality of the PMLA and Arbitrariness of Summons
According To Live Law In response to the bench’s query, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Hemant Soren, presented several arguments. He pointed out that there were ongoing questions related to the constitutionality of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) in the Supreme Court. Additionally, he emphasized the arbitrariness of the summonses issued by the Enforcement Directorate, characterizing them as a “complete witchhunt.”
Supreme Court’s Decision: Approach the High Court
Despite Rohatgi’s efforts to persuade the bench, Justice Trivedi advised him, “Go to the high court.” Justice Bose echoed this sentiment, stating, “See, the case should be started from the high court in general.”
Withdrawal of Plea and Liberty to Approach High Court
Consequently, Mukul Rohatgi, on behalf of Hemant Soren, agreed to withdraw the plea filed in the Supreme Court. In light of this, the bench declared, “Mr. Rohatgi submits that his client would like to approach the high court for the same reliefs. The present petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.”
This development marks a significant step in the legal proceedings related to the money laundering case, as Hemant Soren now has the option to pursue the matter in the Jharkhand High Court.
