The Court hearing petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu government and TASMAC challenging the ED raids conducted from March 6 to March 8. The ED alleged that TASMAC was involved in financial irregularities worth over Rs. 1,000 crore.
Madras: The Madras High Court on Tuesday advised the Tamil Nadu government to think about cooperating with the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the alleged financial irregularities involving TASMAC—the State-run liquor distributor, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation.
ALSO READ: Madras High Court: “TASMAC Claims ED Crossed Jurisdiction Boundaries, Violating PMLA”
A Bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and K Rajasekar made an oral observation, saying there is still a chance for the State to work together with the central agency. The Court also made it clear that the issue should not be seen as a matter of personal pride or ego.
“It is not an ego point,” the Court said.
However, Advocate General (AG) PS Raman, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, strongly opposed this suggestion. He criticised the ED for conducting raids without first seeking the State’s cooperation.
“I will not cooperate when they have come and sat on my office…” the AG said.
In response, the Court repeated:
“It is not an ego point.”
But AG Raman disagreed again, saying:
“It is very much an ego point… did they cooperate? March 6, it (the ED raids) happened. (None of the State authorities) have even benefitted by even a single letter from ED on what has happened. (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) requires them to work in tandem!”
The Court was hearing petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu government and TASMAC challenging the ED raids conducted from March 6 to March 8. The ED alleged that TASMAC was involved in financial irregularities worth over Rs. 1,000 crore.
ALSO READ: BREAKING | TASMAC vs ED: Tamil Nadu Govt Moves Supreme Court Over Raid Case Transfer
After TASMAC’s lawyers finished their arguments, AG Raman began his submissions for the State government. He clarified that the State never refused to help the ED, provided they had followed proper procedure and approached them first.
AG Raman questioned the intention behind the ED’s raids, asking whether they were actually in the public interest.
He highlighted that in various FIRs (First Information Reports) filed by the State police between 2009 and 2024, TASMAC was either the complainant or the victim, not the accused. These FIRs were said to be the basis of the ED’s action.
“You will not find a single case where TASMAC is accused. When that is the case, on March 6, what was reason to attack TASMAC headquarters, keep officials for 70 hours? They have filed pages to say I (ED) have not arrested anyone. This is worse than arrest! … It all comes down to this, what did they find in predicate offence that they made TASMAC subject to search?” the AG argued.
He further said that efforts were being made to tarnish the reputation of TASMAC and the State government.
He referred to BJP leader K Annamalai, without naming him directly, who had also made public allegations against TASMAC.
“I am concerned about the image of the State, the image of the TASMAC! Have they done something wrong? I’ll pull them up. I don’t need my brother-in-law to do it!” the AG stated.
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, representing TASMAC, raised questions about the ED’s jurisdiction. He said that the Court must first examine the FIRs that formed the base of the ED’s ECIR (Enforcement Directorate Crime Information Report).
He said the ED had not shown these FIRs and hence the Court could not yet determine whether the agency had the legal authority to conduct such raids.
Vikas Singh also pointed out that the timing of the ED raids appeared politically motivated, especially with Tamil Nadu Assembly elections scheduled next year.
“Please see the danger, there are 29-30 States. In every State where opposition is in power, ED will pick anyone and (launch probe) … If ED had credibility, then ED would be doing similar things in BJP States also. It is not as if the excise departments of those States are not corrupt. But they pick and choose. That is where federalism (aspect comes in),” he said.
“The ED is smelling a case. Tamil Nadu election is next year, so ED says, okay we will start this year.. we will definitely take this matter to some kind of wild result. We will tarnish the people involved. Why (ED action) suddenly before the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections? This is a question the Court should ask. Why suddenly this allegation that Tamil Nadu excise department is corrupt?”
Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhary also represented TASMAC during the hearing. On the ED’s side, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appeared for the central agency.
