The Supreme Court on June 4th pulled up the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for interrogating a money laundering accused during the wee hours of the morning.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today reprimanded the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its practice of interrogating individuals accused of money laundering during the early hours of the morning.
A Vacation Bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and KV Viswanathan underscored that their concern was not about the specific allegations against the accused, but rather about broader procedural issues. Justice Viswanathan remarked,
“On the other side, without going to merits, what is this happening? You call him at 10:30 AM then we are ok with it, but you are doing it at 3:30 AM. How is this going on? We are not on merits but this is on general perspective.”
The Court addressed the case of a 64-year-old businessman, Ram Issrani, who contested his arrest by the ED, which occurred during unconventional hours following an extensive overnight interrogation. Initially denied relief by the Bombay High Court, Issrani sought recourse in the Supreme Court.
In response to Issrani’s plea, last month the Supreme Court demanded a reply from the ED and granted Issrani the liberty to seek bail from the Vacation Bench of the apex court.
However, during the recent hearing, the Court opted not to deliberate on interim measures but instead scheduled a full hearing on the case’s merits following the summer break, adjourning the matter until July.
Issrani’s arrest in connection with a bank fraud case dates back to last year. He alleged that he was subjected to questioning from 10:30 PM to 3:00 AM on August 7 and 8, 20 hours in total, before being formally arrested at 5:30 AM on August 8.
While the Bombay High Court declined to quash Issrani’s arrest, it did express disapproval of the ED’s practice of conducting interrogations and recording statements at odd hours. The High Court instructed the ED to establish guidelines regarding the timing of such procedures.
Additionally, the High Court emphasized that investigations conducted by the ED differ from those under the Code of Criminal Procedure, as they are considered judicial proceedings, thus warranting procedural diligence.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on ED
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
