The Enforcement Directorate (ED) argued before the Bombay High Court on Thursday that the order remanding Maharashtra Cabinet Minister Nawab Malik to ED custody was not mechanical or illegal and hence the Habeas Corpus petition filed by Malik was not maintainable. .Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh appearing on behalf of ED, opposed the plea filed by Malik challenging his arrest and remand by the central agency in a money laundering case involving underworld don Dawood Ibrahim. He stated at the outset that the petition was not maintainable as grounds raised in the reply filed by ED made it clear.The ED concluded its arguments on Thursday..Besides the argument on maintainability, the ASG made the following submissions:.Habeas corpus will lie only if the remand order is mechanical or absolutely illegalThe order passed remanding Malik to ED custody was passed after considering all submissions and material placed before the special PMLA judge.The special judge had found that the offence of money laundering had been made out and that the arrest was valid. "Just because you do not agree with an order of the judge does not make an order mechanical or illegal. If that is so, then every order of remand will be challenged," the ASG submitted. .Money laundering is an independent offence, to which the rigors of Section 45 of PMLA applyOffences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were separate offences which were independent of the offences mentioned in the schedule of PMLA.Contention was that the Act had broadly defined 'money laundering' to include all activities leading to the actual laundering and those criminal activities were not dependent on the offences mentioned under the schedule of the PMLA. He submitted that even if the Court concluded that the “predicate offence” which has led to the money laundering is quashed, the offence of money laundering will independently survive.ASG submitted that the relief Malik was seeking was essentially in the nature of release from detention which was in the nature of bail. In view of this, the twin conditions under Section 45 (II) under PMLA would apply, he argued. As per the same, the Court has to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence or is not likely to commit any offence while on bail..ECIR is a private document which cannot be quashed; arrest was legalThe contention was that the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) is part of the internal record for ED and hence the same could not be quashed. He also pointed out with the original arrest memo that Section 19 was complied with. Malik was informed of the grounds of arrest and he had acknowledged the same..Justices PB Varale and SM Modak will hear the rejoinder by Malik's counsel tomorrow. .ED had arrested Malik on allegations that he had allegedly purchased a property from underworld don Dawood Ibrahim for an amount of ₹20 lakh (through a company controlled by him - Solidus Investments Pvt. Ltd.) which was lower than the market value (₹3.54 crore as per ready reckoner rate).Malik was allegedly picked up from his residence at 7 am on February 23 for interrogation after he was made to sign the summons issued to him by ED.After interrogation for over 8 hours, Malik was arrested and produced before Special PMLA Judge who remanded him to 8-day ED custody which was extended for 4 days. Eventually Malik was remanded to judicial custody till March 21, 2022. .In his plea filed through Rashmikant & Partners, Malik assailed the ECIR, the arrest and the remand, terming it illegal.He stated that such illegal acts rendered his continued detention illegal and without jurisdiction, thereby entitling him to a writ of habeas corpus and immediate release.He has also sought setting aside of the order of the special PMLA judge dated February 23 by which he was remanded to ED custody for 8 days.