'Can't Wriggle Out Of Mess By Citing Political Vendetta': Jharkhand HC Dismisses Hemant Soren's Plea Against ED Arrest
The Jharkhand High Court, in its dismissal of the writ petition filed by former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the Land 'Scam' case, asserted that he “cannot wriggle out of the mess he created for himself” by raising “bogey of political vendetta.”The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Chandrashekhar...
The Jharkhand High Court, in its dismissal of the writ petition filed by former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the Land 'Scam' case, asserted that he “cannot wriggle out of the mess he created for himself” by raising “bogey of political vendetta.”
The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Chandrashekhar and Justice Navneet Kumar, while rejecting Soren's plea, observed, "The recovery of huge cash from his Delhi residence is not denied by the petitioner and the excuse of the illness of his parents for keeping more than 36 lacs in cash prima facie looks untenable. In this state of affairs, by raising a technical plea the petitioner cannot wriggle out of the mess he created for himself. Like the last resort to a losing litigant, an anxious petitioner has raised the bogey of political vendetta."
"At this stage, this is not possible to hold that the ED has proceeded against the petitioner for no reasons. The admissibility or otherwise of the materials collected by the ED can be examined by the Special Court if a prosecution report is filed against the petitioner. The learned ASG rightly contended that the scheme under the PMLA does not contemplate a mini-trial at this stage," the bench added.
Following the hearing on February 28, the court reserved its decision on Soren's petition against the ED's action pf arresting him. In his petition, Soren asserted that the repeated summons from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was driven by malice and was a component of a political plot to destabilize the democratically elected government in Jharkhand.
He further contended that despite his correspondence and provision of detailed information about his assets, bank accounts, and PAN number, the ED continued to issue summonses, seemingly ignoring his responses.
Questioning the ED's jurisdiction, Soren raised concerns about initiating a new investigation into assets acquired more than 15 years ago, which had previously been acknowledged by the Income Tax Authority as legally obtained.
Soren argued in court that the BJP orchestrated his arrest as part of its strategy to pursue political vendettas against opposition leaders who had come together to form the INDIA Alliance, of which he and his party were active members.
However, during his tenure as Chief Minister, the ED argued that Soren attempted to tamper with evidence after receiving the summons, misusing his authority and position.
The ED took Soren into custody on January 31 in connection with a money laundering case related to an alleged land scam. He has been held at the Birsa Munda Central Jail in Ranchi since February 15, following a 13-day custody period.
The Court observed in its ruling, “This is not a case pleaded by the petitioner that the witnesses were forced or compelled to give their statement under section 50 of the PMLA; not even argued. This is also not the case of the petitioner that the materials produced by the ED are not real. The fabrication and falsification of the property deeds and revenue records are the matters of record, and there is prima facie evidence of the petitioner's association with Bhanu Pratap Prasad. At the relevant time, the petitioner was the Chief Minister and there was manipulation in registering the report in Sadar PS Case No. 272 of 2023.”
“The case set up by the ED against the petitioner is not based only on the statements recorded under section 50 of the PMLA including of those who claimed themselves real owners of the properties in question, there is an abundance of documents that lay a foundation for the arrest and remand of the petitioner to police and judicial custody,” the High Court added while dismissing the petition.
Case Title: Hemant Soren v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 68
Appearance:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Advocate (through V.C) Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Piyush Chitresh, Advocate,
For the Respondents: Mr. S. V. Raju, (A.S.G) (through V.C) Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate, Mr. Saurav Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Rishabh Dubey, Advocate