Won't Insist On Personal Appearance Of Mehbooba Mufti Till March 19, ED Tells Delhi High Court
story
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) today submitted before the Delhi High Court that it would not insist upon the appearance of PDP leader and former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Mehbooba Mufti with respect to a summons issued upon her in a case against her under S.50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.Mufti had moved Court on Monday seeking quashing of summons issued...
Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) today submitted before the Delhi High Court that it would not insist upon the appearance of PDP leader and former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Mehbooba Mufti with respect to a summons issued upon her in a case against her under S.50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
Mufti had moved Court on Monday seeking quashing of summons issued to her by the ED.
Mufti has claimed in her petition that she received the summons on her personal email ID from the official email ID of the Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate on Mar 5 under Sections 50(2) and 50(3) of the PMLA and that it refers to an annexure which "has not been sent to her, and therefore she is not aware of its contents."
She also objected to the fact that she has not been informed if she is being summoned as an accused or as a witness and further not been informed of what she is being summoned in connection with, and the scheduled offence under the PMLA which gave rise to the proceedings in respect of which the summons has been issued to her.
She has challenged the vires of Section 50, and incidental provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 for being "unfairly discriminatory, bereft of safeguards, and violative of Article 20(3) of the Constitution" and has cited various judgments laid down by the Supreme Court in different cases.
In the first hearing of the case today, Standing Counsel Amit Mahajan appeared on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate and stated that the Additional Solicitor General would be arguing the matter, and therefore he sought an adjournment.
He then made a statement that the summons to Mehbooba Mufti to appear before it in New Delhi on Mar 15 would not be insisted upon until the next date of hearing.
The court has posted the matter on Mar 19 for a hearing.
Mufti had moved Court on Monday seeking quashing of summons issued to her by the ED.
Mufti has claimed in her petition that she received the summons on her personal email ID from the official email ID of the Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate on Mar 5 under Sections 50(2) and 50(3) of the PMLA and that it refers to an annexure which "has not been sent to her, and therefore she is not aware of its contents."
She also objected to the fact that she has not been informed if she is being summoned as an accused or as a witness and further not been informed of what she is being summoned in connection with, and the scheduled offence under the PMLA which gave rise to the proceedings in respect of which the summons has been issued to her.
She has challenged the vires of Section 50, and incidental provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 for being "unfairly discriminatory, bereft of safeguards, and violative of Article 20(3) of the Constitution" and has cited various judgments laid down by the Supreme Court in different cases.
In the first hearing of the case today, Standing Counsel Amit Mahajan appeared on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate and stated that the Additional Solicitor General would be arguing the matter, and therefore he sought an adjournment.
He then made a statement that the summons to Mehbooba Mufti to appear before it in New Delhi on Mar 15 would not be insisted upon until the next date of hearing.
The court has posted the matter on Mar 19 for a hearing.