[ECL Coal Mining case] Delhi High Court stays Kolkata Police notices to ED officers

The Delhi High Court has stayed the operation of notices issued by the Kolkata Police to the three Directorate of Enforcement (ED) officers probing the high profile ECL illegal coal mining case [Directorate of Enforcement v State of West Bengal].

. The order was passed by Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar in a plea filed by the ED and its three officers. It was argued that a first information report (FIR) was registered in April this year at Kalighat Police Station after which notices were issued to them in July and August only because they were probing the scam in which the names of Abhishek Banerjee, nephew of Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, and several other prominent persons emerged.

. The said FIR was registered by the West Bengal Police on the complaint of Abhishek Banerjee under Sections 171 G, 466, 469, 474, 500, 501, 504 & 120 B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) after a news channel ran some fake videos about him.

. The ED and its officers argued that they were directly involved with the investigation of the alleged scam and that the FIR was registered with a mala fide intention to derail the investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The ED added that none of its officers were named in the FIR, which was registered on the same day Banerjee was summoned by the agency.

It was further added that notices under Section 160(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) can only be issued to a person who is within the local jurisdiction of that police station or within the jurisdiction of an adjoining police station. In this case, the officers are posted in Delhi, which is clearly outside the jurisdiction of the PS Kalighat, the plea contended.

Counsel for the petitioners further added that notices can only be issued to persons who are either accused or witnesses, and since the ED and its officers are neither named in the FIR nor are they witnesses, the notices are without jurisdiction.

. Counsel appearing for the State of West Bengal, however, challenged the maintainability of the petition, arguing that the notices were issued to the officers in their personal capacity and that a petition under Article 226 cannot be filed by ED as an aggrieved person. The lawyer said that the Delhi High Court lacks territorial jurisdiction in the case, as notices have been issued by the Kolkata Police in an FIR registered in West Bengal. It was further submitted that the word “adjoining” in Section 160 CrPC implies vesting of jurisdiction outside the State as well.

. After hearing the parties, Justice Bhatnagar was of the prima facie view that a serious challenge has been presented on the competence of the Kolkata Police to issue the notices. The Court that the petitioners are living in Delhi and since a considerable case of mala fides has been raised by them, there is a prima facie issue with regard to its territorial jurisdiction as well.

Therefore, the Court stayed the operation of the notices and has now given the State of West Bengal four weeks to file its response to the petition. The Court asked the petitioners to file rejoinders with two weeks after that, and listed the case for further hearing on February 18.

. Advocates Amit Mahajan and Kritagya Kumar Kait appeared for the ED. Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra along with Advocates Anand Grover, Suhaan Mukherji, Chitralekha Das, Abhishek Manchanda, Asif Ahmed and Aditya Raju appeared for the West Bengal government.

. [Read Order]

[ECL Coal Mining case] Delhi High Court stays Kolkata Police notices to ED officers

Prashant Jha

Related Stories