By Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the pleas filed by TN Minister Thiru Senthil Balaji and his wife against the Madras High Court’s order regarding legality of his arrest and custodial interrogation by granting ED custody till August 12, 2023.
A bench of Justices AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh ruled that the word “custody” under section 167 CrPC would also include such other custody and also held that the writ of habeas corpus was not maintainable against the order of remand.
While reserving the verdict last Wednesday, the bench termed ED’s proposition regarding “non-applicability” of section 167 CrPC to PMLA officers which deals with producing an arrested person before the Magistrate.
“It is a very dangerous proposition that section 167 CrPC does not apply & you (ED) can take your own sweet time,” Justice MM Sundresh said.
ALSO READ: ED seized Rs 22 lakh cash, property documents from Senthil Balaji’s close aide
Balaji and his wife had approached SC on July 4 and July 14 which were delivered by a bench of two judges and a single judge respectively.
Challenging his Enforcement Directorate custody, Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji had told SC that ED had no vested right to interrogate an accused in custody after the lapse of 15 days from the date of arrest.
“On the face of it…There is no vested right, even in the first 15 days. It’s at the discretion of the Magistrate. Any one exclusion…will affect the entire scheme. Beyond 15, you automatically shift to judicial custody. There is no exclusion of time in the first 15 days. Once the clock starts ticking, it cannot be stopped. There is no vested right after 15 days,” Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi had submitted.
Also for the minister, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had submitted that ED cannot seek custody as they are not police officers. Referring to section 167 CrPC which deals with the power of police regarding custody and top court’s ruling in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary of holding that ED officials under PMLA are not Police officers, he also said that the period of custody of such arrested person with the ED officials cannot be beyond the first 24 hours of arrest.
Vehemently opposing the submissions made by Balaji, SG Tushar Mehta for ED said that the probe agency’s efforts to get exclusive custody were stalled as the minister abused the law by approaching multiple courts.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the pleas filed by TN Minister Thiru Senthil Balaji and his wife against the Madras High Court’s order regarding legality of his arrest and custodial interrogation by granting ED custody till August 12, 2023.
A bench of Justices AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh ruled that the word “custody” under section 167 CrPC would also include such other custody and also held that the writ of habeas corpus was not maintainable against the order of remand.
While reserving the verdict last Wednesday, the bench termed ED’s proposition regarding “non-applicability” of section 167 CrPC to PMLA officers which deals with producing an arrested person before the Magistrate.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
“It is a very dangerous proposition that section 167 CrPC does not apply & you (ED) can take your own sweet time,” Justice MM Sundresh said.
ALSO READ: ED seized Rs 22 lakh cash, property documents from Senthil Balaji’s close aide
Balaji and his wife had approached SC on July 4 and July 14 which were delivered by a bench of two judges and a single judge respectively.
Challenging his Enforcement Directorate custody, Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji had told SC that ED had no vested right to interrogate an accused in custody after the lapse of 15 days from the date of arrest.
“On the face of it…There is no vested right, even in the first 15 days. It’s at the discretion of the Magistrate. Any one exclusion…will affect the entire scheme. Beyond 15, you automatically shift to judicial custody. There is no exclusion of time in the first 15 days. Once the clock starts ticking, it cannot be stopped. There is no vested right after 15 days,” Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi had submitted.
Also for the minister, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had submitted that ED cannot seek custody as they are not police officers. Referring to section 167 CrPC which deals with the power of police regarding custody and top court’s ruling in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary of holding that ED officials under PMLA are not Police officers, he also said that the period of custody of such arrested person with the ED officials cannot be beyond the first 24 hours of arrest.
Vehemently opposing the submissions made by Balaji, SG Tushar Mehta for ED said that the probe agency’s efforts to get exclusive custody were stalled as the minister abused the law by approaching multiple courts.
