SC seeks response of Jharkhand govt, ED on plea for SIT probe against BJP MP

New Delhi, Oct 14 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on a plea seeking a court-monitored SIT probe into allegations of corruption, possession of disproportionate assets, and benami properties against BJP MP from Jharkhand Dhullu Mahto.

A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order after hearing arguments from advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for petitioner Somnath Chatterjee, a social worker.

The bench sought responses from the Jharkhand government and central investigating agencies including the Enforcement Directorate and the Income Tax Department.

The petitioner has alleged that the Dhanbad MP has amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income and is involved in various criminal activities.

He sought the constitution of a court-monitored SIT headed by a retired high court judge, with senior officers drawn from the CBI, ED, I-T Department, and Jharkhand Police to carry out a comprehensive investigation in a time-bound manner.

According to the plea, Chatterjee had initially approached the Jharkhand High Court in 2018, seeking directions to statutory authorities to file inquiry reports pursuant to a 2016 order in an earlier PIL against Mahto.

The high court, however, dismissed the petition, terming it a “wagering attempt”.

Subsequently, the petitioner filed a fresh PIL before the high court, pressing for an SIT probe and the transfer of all pending investigations before different agencies to such a team. He also sought a continuing mandamus to enable regular judicial monitoring of the probe.

Bhushan argued that the ED and I-T Department had themselves admitted in affidavits before the high court that disproportionate assets and benami properties were discovered in Mahto’s case, yet investigations were “not progressing at a proper pace”.

The ED and I-T Department, opposing the plea, contended that the petition was not maintainable in light of the high court’s earlier orders in 2016 and 2024, dismissing similar petitions.

They informed the top court that the ED had already registered a case based on FIRs against Mahto, and that the I-T Department had issued notices and initiated reassessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act.

They also objected to the petition on the ground that Mahto had not been impleaded as a party.

The high court, after hearing the parties, had dismissed the PIL holding that it did not qualify as a matter of genuine public interest, as similar allegations had been previously examined and rejected.

Challenging the dismissal before the top court, the petitioner contends that the high court failed to appreciate the agencies’ own admissions regarding the discovery of benami assets and disproportionate income.

He argued that the court “ignored crucial facts” and failed to explain why the matter was not in public interest despite overwhelming evidence of corruption. PTI SJK ABA SJK KVK KVK