Enforcement Directorate v Kerala Police : Live Updates From Kerala High Court Hearing

SG exclaims : Two invisible lady constables have given the statement! This is the minimum you'll check in a genuine preliminary enquiry.

SG now refers to the findings of the Court while refusing bail to Swapna Suresh.

SG : Nowhere, whether directly or indirectly, she has given any statement that she was pressurized. She is not an illiterate lady without any legal assistance.

SG : This lady had several opportunities before a neutral forum. She did not have to wait for a lady officer to come with an audio recording to say this. She had opportunities before none other than the judge.

SG : There cannot be a second agency guessing whether an evidence which is already before a court is fabricated.

SG : In every investigation, there will be an allegation in trial that the evidence is fabricated.

I pose a question to my self. Will it be rule of law if another agency examines that before the court has had a look on it? It is antithetical to rule of law and constitution.

SG : My respectful submission is that this can be done only by the Special Judge at the end of the trial.

You cannot have a second agency take a second guess at the investigation of another agency, which is placed before a competent court.

SG : Before the Special PMLA Court has taken any action, the local police is now saying my(ED) evidence is fabricated. This is nothing but a malicious case. These are the cases for which Sec 482 is there.

SG : Only the Special Judge(PMLA) can say this to take action against ED officials, looking at the evidence before the court. Only the PMLA court can direct prosecution of the ED officials.

SG refers to the statement in FIR that it was registered on the basis of legal opinion.

'The correct legal opinion should have been, since the allegation is relating to evidence which is before a court, it is only that court which can take cognizance of pressurizing'