The Crossbill News Desk
Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai on Monday ( August 18), defended the Supreme Court’s recent criticism of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), stressing that any remarks made by the bench were based strictly on facts and were not intended to target the agency.
His clarification came during a hearing on the ED’s raids at the offices of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), The Hindu reported.
The matter stems from a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government challenging the ED’s investigation into TASMAC, after the Madras High Court in April declined to stay the probe.
Taking up the case earlier on May 22, the Supreme Court had come down heavily on the agency, observing that the ED was “crossing all limits” in the manner it had acted against the corporation.
“How can a corporation commit an offence? The ED is crossing all limits,” CJI Gavai had asked Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, who appeared for the ED at the time.
The Chief Justice had also remarked, “You are totally violating the federal structure of the country.”
At Monday’s hearing, the ED sought to defend itself from the court’s criticism. CJI Gavai asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, present in court, whether he wished to contend that the Supreme Court’s observations were unwarranted.
Before Mehta could respond, Additional Solicitor General Raju intervened, prompting the CJI to clarify, “Of course, we don’t hold anything against anyone… we are only on the facts.”
Raju then voiced concern over the impact of the court’s remarks.
“I am sorry to say this… the perception that this court expresses percolates to not only the media but also the judiciary,” he said. Mehta added, “especially the lower courts.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the State of Tamil Nadu, countered the ED’s complaint, remarking that “the perception (of ED) is out there” in the public domain and “even if the court does not say anything, the perception remains.”
In the earlier May hearing, the Supreme Court had also stayed proceedings in the money laundering case linked to TASMAC, underscoring its unease with the agency’s approach. With the latest exchange, the court has reiterated that its remarks are grounded in fact, even as the ED presses to defend its image.
His clarification came during a hearing on the ED’s raids at the offices of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), The Hindu reported.
The matter stems from a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government challenging the ED’s investigation into TASMAC, after the Madras High Court in April declined to stay the probe.
Taking up the case earlier on May 22, the Supreme Court had come down heavily on the agency, observing that the ED was “crossing all limits” in the manner it had acted against the corporation.
“How can a corporation commit an offence? The ED is crossing all limits,” CJI Gavai had asked Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, who appeared for the ED at the time.
The Chief Justice had also remarked, “You are totally violating the federal structure of the country.”
At Monday’s hearing, the ED sought to defend itself from the court’s criticism. CJI Gavai asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, present in court, whether he wished to contend that the Supreme Court’s observations were unwarranted.
Before Mehta could respond, Additional Solicitor General Raju intervened, prompting the CJI to clarify, “Of course, we don’t hold anything against anyone… we are only on the facts.”
Raju then voiced concern over the impact of the court’s remarks.
“I am sorry to say this… the perception that this court expresses percolates to not only the media but also the judiciary,” he said. Mehta added, “especially the lower courts.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the State of Tamil Nadu, countered the ED’s complaint, remarking that “the perception (of ED) is out there” in the public domain and “even if the court does not say anything, the perception remains.”
In the earlier May hearing, the Supreme Court had also stayed proceedings in the money laundering case linked to TASMAC, underscoring its unease with the agency’s approach. With the latest exchange, the court has reiterated that its remarks are grounded in fact, even as the ED presses to defend its image.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment