The Supreme Court today directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to not take any coercive action against Nalini Chidambaram in relation with the Saradha Chit fund scam..Earlier this year, the Madras High Court had dismissed pleas made by Nalini that she be exempted from personally appearing before the ED, Kolkata, in connection with the investigation into the Saradha scam..Following a challenge to the same, the Bench of Justices AK Sikhri and Ashok Bhushan has issued notice to the ED and has also directed that no coercive action be taken by the ED against Nalini Chidambaram..The summons in question had been issued under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, directing Chidambaram to personally appear before the ED, Kolkata..Objecting to this summons, it was contended that the ED’s powers were subject to Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973. Section 160 provides inter alia that a woman cannot be required to attend an investigation at any place other than the place in which she resides..It was also argued that Chidambaram’s personal presence was not required in the case and that repeated insistence on her personal appearance before the ED amounted to harassment.
The Supreme Court today directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to not take any coercive action against Nalini Chidambaram in relation with the Saradha Chit fund scam..Earlier this year, the Madras High Court had dismissed pleas made by Nalini that she be exempted from personally appearing before the ED, Kolkata, in connection with the investigation into the Saradha scam..Following a challenge to the same, the Bench of Justices AK Sikhri and Ashok Bhushan has issued notice to the ED and has also directed that no coercive action be taken by the ED against Nalini Chidambaram..The summons in question had been issued under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, directing Chidambaram to personally appear before the ED, Kolkata..Objecting to this summons, it was contended that the ED’s powers were subject to Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973. Section 160 provides inter alia that a woman cannot be required to attend an investigation at any place other than the place in which she resides..It was also argued that Chidambaram’s personal presence was not required in the case and that repeated insistence on her personal appearance before the ED amounted to harassment.
