Delhi High Court Stays Trial Court Direction For Inquiry Against Enforcement Directorate’s Assistant Director, Other Officials
The Delhi High Court has stayed a trial court order to the extent it directed an inquiry to be initiated against an investigating officer — an Assistant Director-rank officer of the Enforcement Directorate, and his superior officers over “unjustified incarceration” of an accused in jail for 17 days.Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma issued notice on ED’s plea and ordered:“List the matter...
The Delhi High Court has stayed a trial court order to the extent it directed an inquiry to be initiated against an investigating officer — an Assistant Director-rank officer of the Enforcement Directorate, and his superior officers over “unjustified incarceration” of an accused in jail for 17 days.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma issued notice on ED’s plea and ordered:
“List the matter on 04.09.2023. In the meantime, the impugned order pertaining to direction to the ED to conduct an inquiry with regard to the working of Investigating officer and administrative failure of his superior officers, which led to the unjustified incarceration of the respondent Om Prakash behind the bar for 17 days is stayed.”
The impugned order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar Jangala of Patiala House Courts on June 30.
The trial court had ordered release of one Om Prakash from jail, who was in judicial custody, while noting that no application for extension of his custody or seeking his release was moved by the probe agency on his production.
Om Prakash was arrested by ED on June 12 in pursuance of open ended non-bailable warrant and was remanded to judicial custody for three days. Thereafter, his judicial custody was extended for 14 days on June 15. He was then produced before the ASJ after completion of 14 days judicial custody.
However, the trial court judge had noted that a “very precarious situation” had arisen before it as the ED initially got NBWs issued against the accused and arrested him, however, the IO later said that the agency does not want his custody after completion of 17 days in custody.
The judge had said that the ED, after the arrest of the accused, was either required to get his custody extended from the court or should have moved an application for his release from the custody but it failed to comply with legal mandate.
Title: Directorate of Enforcement v. Om Prakash