New Delhi: A Delhi court pulled up the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for arresting a Singapore-based businessman at Kolkata airport in connection with an aircraft deal dating back to the era of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. The court ruled that the action of the central agency was “unjustified”, for it had not sought permission from the court before carrying out the arrest.
According to New Indian Express, Anil Antil, a special court judge at Delhi’s Rouse Avenue, declared the arrest “illegal” and granted interim bail to Inder Dev Bhalla. Bhalla was arrested on February 13 at Netaji Subash Chandra Bose Kolkata International Airport.
Bhalla, director of Interdev Aviation Services, is accused of creating shell companies to launder money obtained as commission from the aircraft deal. The case relates to the supply of three EMP -145 aircraft to the government of India under the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).
His arrest, according to the agency, was based on nonbailable warrants and look-out circulars (LOC). The ED had sought 14 days of custody of the accused for interrogation.
Granting interim bail to the accused, the court said that his arrest was based on the non-bailable warrant issued in 2018, while the agency had already filed a chargesheet after that and its cognisance was taken in March 2021.
“The agency was not legally empowered to arrest the accused without the indulgence of the court, nor is it empowered now legally to seek its custody remand at this stage of the case knowing fully well the fact that the accused had been summoned by the court on their own complaint and request after taking cognisance,” Delhi Rouse Avenue court special judge Anil Antil observed in the order, according to Hindustan Times.
The lawyer for the accused, Sakshi Kakkar, had told the court earlier that Bhalla had never received any summons to join the investigation and the non-bailable warrants were taken “misleading the court”. Kakkar had also told the court that Bhalla’s arrest was “illegal”, as Section 13 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was not complied with and the grounds on which he was arrested were not informed to Bhalla, according to Livelaw.in.
Judge Antil, in his order, said that a PMLA complaint in the matter was filed in December 2020 after carrying out due investigation against the accused, including Bhalla. The court also noted that cognisance of the case was taken in March 2021 and summons were also issued to the accused.
According to Livelaw, the judge in continuation said, “It may also be noted that subsequent thereto when the summons had remained unserved for one reasons or the other; fresh summons were issued by the court; the applications were also moved on behalf of the IO and agencies to seek fresh summons to serve the accused persons including the accused No. 11.”
The judge then went on to say, “So, when after the carrying out the investigation, complaint/chargesheet has been filed against the accused herein; cognisance of the offences has be been taken; summons have been issued pursuant to that, the Act of the agency in apprehending/arresting the accused without the permission of the Court, and/or seeking his PC is totally unjustified in the given facts and circumstances of the case.”
Pulling up the central agency, the court said it cannot act in a “camouflage manner” to arrest the accused, and added that the agency carried out summons to execute them for his appearance and also took the aid of non-bailable warrants to justify his arrest at the same time, according to Hindustan Times.
Dismissing the plea of the central agency for Bhalla’s custody, the court released him on interim bail till the next date of hearing, which is February 24, upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh with one surety of the same amount.