'Unable To Appreciate Why Interrogation Cannot Be Done At Kolkata': Calcutta HC Raps ED Over Non-Issuance Of Summons In WB Coal Scam Probe

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday expressed displeasure at the manner in which the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is investigating a money laundering case linked to the alleged coal scam in West Bengal. The Court was adjudicating upon the plea of Sumit Roy, who is the secretary to All India Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee. 

Roy had challenged the jurisdiction of the Enforcement Directorate to register a case in New Delhi when the offence has been allegedly committed within the territory of West Bengal and a specific case  was registered by the CBI in the State. Furthermore, he had also challenged the constitutional validity of certain sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), dealing with the issuance of summons to an individual and had accordingly prayed for quashing of the summons issued to him by the ED. 

Earlier, the High Court vide order dated November 9, 2021 had directed the Enforcement Directorate to not take any coercive action against Sumit Roy for 6 weeks.  On Tuesday, the Court took on record the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Enforcement Directorate and the ffidavit-in-reply filed by the party.. 

Justice Rajasekhar Mantha on Tuesday was apprised by the petitioner that although he is cooperating with the investigation, not a single summons has been issued to him till date.

"The writ petitioner is cooperating with the investigation. It is submitted that not a single summons has been issued to the petitioner till date", the Court recorded in its order. 

However, the counsel appearing for the Enforcement Directorate submitted that summons were issued initially asking the petitioner to appear for interrogation at New Delhi. Expressing reservation to such a submission, the Court remarked further, 

"This Court is unable to appreciate as to why the interrogation cannot be done at Kolkata at least in the interregnum."

The Court further noted that the instant plea had been admitted by a coordinate Bench of the High Court and had called for the requisite affidavits to be filed. However, the Court observed that the interim order issued vide order dated November 9, 2021 would continue for a period of 2 months. 

"In that view of the matter, the interim order already passed shall continue for a period of two months from date", the Court directed further. 

Accordingly, the matter was disposed of with the following observation, 

"Let this matter go out of list. Liberty is reserved to the parties to mention for hearing, in the event of changed circumstances and when hearing is permitted."

Case Title: Sumit Roy v. The Union of India & Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 7.

Click Here To Read/Download Order