In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has refused to quash the summons issued to West Bengal Law Minister Moloy Ghatak by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a coal pilferage case. This decision comes at a crucial time when the Supreme Court is reviewing certain provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Also read- Delhi High Court Halts ED Probe Against Hero MotoCorp’s Pawan Munjal (lawchakra.in)
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, presiding over the case, made a critical observation regarding the constitutional rights of individuals summoned by the ED. The court stated,
“Mere issuance of summons under section 50 of PMLA for the purpose of giving information or evidence, whether oral or documentary, will not attract the protection guaranteed by the Indian Constitution under Article 20(3), as the argument in itself is contradictory, since on the one hand, the petitioner himself states that he does not know whether he is accused or witness, on the other hand, he wants protection as an accused and a direction that he cannot be a witness against himself.”
Ghatak’s petition sought to quash the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), equivalent to an FIR in an ordinary criminal case, and the summons issued to him. He also requested the agency not to summon him to Delhi. Addressing Ghatak’s concerns about being summoned to Delhi, considering his age and medical condition, the court noted that the ED was earlier asked to consider calling him at its Kolkata office. Subsequently, Justice Sharma directed that the ED could require Ghatak’s attendance in its Kolkata office, giving at least 24 hours’ notice.
Furthermore, the court issued notices to the Kolkata police commissioner and the West Bengal chief secretary to ensure adequate police protection for the ED officers during Ghatak’s examination or interrogation in Kolkata. The court added,
“The petitioner being the Law Minister of the State of West Bengal itself where he wants to be examined will also ensure that no harm is caused to the officers of Directorate of Enforcement examining him at Kolkata as this relief is being granted to him at his request only.”
The court also highlighted Ghatak’s repeated non-compliance with the ED’s summons, noting that he had not appeared before the agency on 11 out of 12 occasions. Justice Sharma remarked,
“In such circumstances, when he himself has not appeared before the ED except once, such relief cannot even be considered by this court, at this stage.”
The case against Ghatak is part of a broader investigation initiated in November 2020 by the CBI and the ED under the PMLA. It involves allegations of illegal excavation and theft of coal from the leasehold area of the Eastern Coalfield Ltd (ECL), in collusion with officials from ECL, CISF, Indian Railways, and other departments.
This ruling by the Delhi High Court is a clear indication of the judiciary’s approach to the application of constitutional protections in the context of PMLA investigations, especially in cases involving high-profile individuals and significant economic offenses.