Supreme Court Criticizes ED's Interrogation Methods in Ex-Haryana MLA Case

Apex court upholds High Court decision quashing arrest in money laundering case, terms 15-hour interrogation as 'inhuman'; raises questions about ED's handling of investigations and PMLA applicability.

Representational Image

January 4, 2025

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has criticized the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its "high-handedness" and "inhuman conduct" in the case of former Haryana Congress MLA Surender Panwar. The court specifically condemned the agency's decision to interrogate Panwar for 15 hours, leading to his arrest at 1:40 AM.

Legal Implications of the Ruling

A bench comprising Justices AS Oka and AG Masih upheld the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision that declared Panwar's arrest illegal. However, the court clarified that this ruling will not affect the merits of the pending complaint under Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.

Technical Questions About PMLA Applicability

The High Court had raised a crucial technical point regarding the case's foundation. It noted that "illegal mining," an offense under Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, was not included in the schedule attached to the PMLA. This observation led to the court's conclusion that Panwar couldn't be prosecuted by the ED under these circumstances.

The Supreme Court's decision highlights growing concerns about investigation methods used by enforcement agencies and the need for adherence to proper procedures in high-profile cases. The ruling also brings attention to the technical aspects of PMLA's applicability in cases related to illegal mining, potentially affecting similar cases across the country.