The Delhi High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Anu Malhotra sought the response of the Enforcement Directorate on a plea filed by Popular Front of India (PFI) challenging a money laundering case registered against it in the year 2018. (PFI v. ED)
Facts of the case
The petition was filed by Popular Front of India (PFI) challenging a money laundering case registered against it in the year 2018.
Contention of the Parties
The counsel appearing on behalf of PFI, apprised the Court that the matter was registered by the Enforcement Directorate out of a case registered by the National Investigation Agency which concerned the alleged training of youngsters in Kerala for carrying out anti national activities.
The counsel also apprised the Court that according to the NIA, in the year 2013, some bricks and lathis were found in a meeting for the purpose of the said meeting.
The Trial Court had convicted some persons for the offences under IPC, Explosives Act and UAPA. However, in appeal, the High Court had dropped the UAPA offences saying there were no anti national activities.
He therefore argued that in light of the High Court's opinion, there was no reason for the Enforcement Directorate to proceed against the petitioner.
He also stated that as many as 150 summons have been received by PFI's members so far across the Country and claimed it to be a "roving and fishing inquiry" by the agency.
He submitted that the agency was not following the directions issued by the Apex Court regarding installation of cctv cameras at the place of interrogation.
On the other hand, counsel appearing for the Enforcement Directorate stated that the agency was complying with the said directions "in letter and spirit".
Courts Observation and Judgment
The bench issuing notice on the plea, granted four weeks time to the agency for filing it's response and posted the matter for further hearing on February 4, 2022.
The Court also added that it was expected that the cctv cameras of the agency will remain functional at the time of recording of the statements.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
