Rajasthan High Court quashes ED summons to Congress candidate Mewaram Jain; questions timing of summons

The Rajasthan High Court on Wednesday quashed the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to Mewaram Jain who is the Congress party's candidate from Barmer in the upcoming State assembly polls [Mewa Ram Jain versus State of Rajasthan]. .The summons was issued asking him to appear before the agency in Jaipur.Considering that polling in the State is scheduled to be held on November 25, Justice Farjand Ali said that if the summons is deferred for a period of seven days, it would not result in any adverse impact on the money laundering proceedings.The Court said that the notice in the given circumstances was not appropriate and said his presence is inevitably required in his assembly constituency due to the elections."I am of this view that notice issued by the respondent department against the petitioner for this period is not appropriate in the given circumstances," the Court said.It would not be within reason and feasible for him to travel 500 kilometers to the concerned Office at Jaipur and 500 kilometers back to his constituency, that too, when it is not at all clear as to what is the purpose for the summons and in what capacity (accused/witness) he has been summoned, the Court said..The Court added that an electoral candidate’s right to contest encompasses the right to canvass as well. "The petitioner is a candidate contesting State Legislative Assembly elections and in a democratic setup like ours, his right to contest in an election encompasses the right to canvass as well the impugned summon is deferred for a period of about seven days then it would not result in any adverse impact on the proceedings as such," the Court said.With regard to the summons, the Court opined that the petitioner has the right to know the nature of accusation against him if he is an accused. It added that if he has been summoned to depose a statement before the authorities, then he has a right to know for what purposes and in what matter his presence would be required to enable him to collect the requisite material to satisfy the summon."In the least, the petitioner has a right to know the nature of accusation against him if he is an accused or if he has been summoned to depose a statement before the authorities, then he has a right to know for what purposes and in what matter his presence would be required so as to enable him to collect the requisite material in order to leave Barmer just to satisfy the summon of the respondent," the Court stated..Thus, the Court said even if the petitioner is made to appear in compliance with the summons, it would not serve any fruitful purpose.Accordingly, the Court set aside the summons and granted the ED a liberty to issue a fresh notice with better particulars for any date after December 3.“Needless to say, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court again for redressal of his grievances that may persist, if any,” it added. Senior Advocate Vikas Balia and Advocate Falgun Buch represented the petitionerCentral Government Standing Counsel BP Bohra represented the ED[Read Judgment]