In relief for Jharkhand CM, SC stays trial in criminal case for not obeying summons

New Delhi, Feb 25 (PTI) In a relief to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren, the Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the trial in a case related to wilful disobedience of summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the money laundering case registered against him.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate on the plea of Soren seeking quashing of the case.

In his plea before the top court, Soren also challenged the repetitive summons issued to him by the ED in the money laundering cases related to stone-chip illegal mining scam.

Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Arunabh Choudhary, and advocate Pragya Baghel, appearing for Soren, said the ED has been issuing summons after summons to him.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Kaushik, appearing for the ED, said Soren was issued seven summons, but he did not appear before the agency. He added that the trial against him was almost complete and only one witness remained to be examined.

CJI Kant told Kaushik, "We were reading in the newspaper, you (ED) have filed some bulk complaints. You should concentrate and spend your energy on those complaints. You will have some constructive outcomes." Justice Bagchi added, "You should focus on effective prosecution. These are in terrorerm (in fear) prosecution. Purpose has been served." Soren has challenged the recent Jharkhand High Court's decision refusing to quash the case against him.

On January 15, the high court refused to quash the cognisance taken against Soren by a special MP-MLA court in a complaint case filed by the ED, dealing a setback to the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader.

The ED had filed a complaint case against Soren for not appearing before it despite summonses issued by it in connection with his alleged involvement in an alleged illegal stone-chip mining scam.

The special MP-MLA court judge at Ranchi had earlier taken cognisance of the complaint and issued summons to Soren to appear before the court.

The ED alleged in the impugned complaint that during the investigation in a money laundering case registered against Soren, he was issued six summons and one letter under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, requiring his personal appearance.

It was alleged that Soren failed to appear on the specified dates on one pretext or another and thereby intentionally disobeyed the summons, constituting an offence under Section 174 of the IPC.

The ED claimed that the investigation could not progress in the absence of Soren's presence and cooperation, and that he was required to be examined for a proper investigation into the alleged scam.

On the basis of the said complaint, the chief judicial magistrate, Ranchi, took cognisance of the offence on March 4, 2024, and the matter was later transferred to the Special Court (MP/MLA), Ranchi.

Soren approached the high court for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings initiated against him in the complaint case, including the order dated March 4, 2024, whereby cognisance was taken by the CJM, Ranchi.

The JMM leader contended that the order of the CJM taking cognisance and issuing summons against him is in utter and gross abuse of the process of law.

"The entire complaint filed by the respondent agency (ED) is misconceived, frivolous and vexatious, and has been filed with an ulterior aim to harass, humiliate and browbeat the Petitioner. It is trite that criminal proceedings and the process of criminal court ought not to be permitted to be utilised as a tool for harassment and to wreak vengeance, more so, by a Central law enforcement agency," plea of Soren said.

Soren said that he has canvassed before the high court that seeking judicial remedies by assailing the legality and validity of the summons cannot be construed as "intentional omission" to respond to the summons and/or evading the summons.

"It is trite that the right to judicial remedies and access to court is a fundamental right, and therefore, the prosecution launched by the ED for the offence under Section 174 IPC is in gross abuse of the process of law," his plea said.

Soren added that he had, on each and every step, duly replied and responded to the summons issued against him, and he, in exercise of his fundamental rights, had assailed these summons before this court as well as the high court.

"Therefore, the alleged non-appearance and disobedience to the summons issued cannot in any manner be termed as "intentional" so as to attract the offence under Section 174 IPC.

"The finding of the high court that the defence of an accused person cannot be considered before prosecution adduces evidence is ex facie erroneous and unsustainable and in the teeth of the settled position in law that material of unimpeachable evidence and sterling quality can be looked into by the High Court in proceedings under Section 482 CrPC," the plea said.

Soren submitted that ED had sought to "wrongfully implicate" him in another case, being a purported stone chips mining scam in Jharkhand and had issued multiple summons to him. PTI MNL PKS SJK MNL NSD NSD