NEW DELHI: Posing tough questions to former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren who has challenged his arrest in an alleged money laundering case relating to illegal possession of 8.8 acres in Ranchi, Supreme Court on Tuesday said since the chargesheet had been taken cognisance of, the trial court was prima facie satisfied that an offence was committed.
“HC rejected your bail plea.Subsequently, the trial court took cognisance of the chargesheet, meaning thereby it was satisfied that prima facie you have committed an offence. The orders of HC and the trial court have not been challenged by you. Can you now challenge arrest by ED under PMLA,” asked a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and S C Sharma.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal said Soren was arrested on Jan 31 and on that date, there was no evidence under PMLA against him. “At best, ED allegation is that Soren was in illegal possession of the land. But that is not a predicate offence for invocation of PMLA. If there was no ground for his arrest on Jan 31, then it has to be set aside,” he said.
Appearing for ED, additional solicitor general S V Raju said Soren’s case was different from that of Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal. “In Kejriwal’s case, the trial court had not taken cognisance of the chargesheet. Here, the trial court has taken cognisance after being prima facie satisfied that there is material evidence against Soren,” he said.
Raju suggested postponing the hearing to the second week of July, when the court will resume normal business . Sibal said if Soren did not get interim bail to campaign, Lok Sabha elections would be over by June 1. The bench accepted Sibal’s request for continuing the hearing on Wednesday.
“HC rejected your bail plea.Subsequently, the trial court took cognisance of the chargesheet, meaning thereby it was satisfied that prima facie you have committed an offence. The orders of HC and the trial court have not been challenged by you. Can you now challenge arrest by ED under PMLA,” asked a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and S C Sharma.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal said Soren was arrested on Jan 31 and on that date, there was no evidence under PMLA against him. “At best, ED allegation is that Soren was in illegal possession of the land. But that is not a predicate offence for invocation of PMLA. If there was no ground for his arrest on Jan 31, then it has to be set aside,” he said.
Appearing for ED, additional solicitor general S V Raju said Soren’s case was different from that of Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal. “In Kejriwal’s case, the trial court had not taken cognisance of the chargesheet. Here, the trial court has taken cognisance after being prima facie satisfied that there is material evidence against Soren,” he said.
Raju suggested postponing the hearing to the second week of July, when the court will resume normal business . Sibal said if Soren did not get interim bail to campaign, Lok Sabha elections would be over by June 1. The bench accepted Sibal’s request for continuing the hearing on Wednesday.
