Key Points

The Madras High Court has taken a strong stance against the Enforcement Directorate's repeated legal violations in the TASMAC liquor scam investigation. The court summoned the ED Joint Director to appear personally after the agency issued summons despite an existing interim stay. This action follows the court's previous order restricting the ED from using seized documents and criticizing their non-compliance. The case highlights significant judicial scrutiny of investigative agency conduct in a high-profile corruption probe.

Key Points: Madras HC Slams ED Over TASMAC Scam Summons Violation

  • Madras HC criticizes ED for issuing summons despite interim stay
  • Court orders ED Joint Director to appear on September 17
  • High Court previously restrained ED from using seized documents
  • Contempt petition filed by film producer Akash Bhaskaran
3 min read

'Limit to everything... ': Madras HC summons ED Joint Director in contempt case over TASMAC scam

Madras High Court summons ED Joint Director for contempt after issuing illegal summons in Rs 1,000 crore TASMAC liquor scam probe

'Limit to everything... ': Madras HC summons ED Joint Director in contempt case over TASMAC scam
"There is a limit to everything - Madras High Court Bench"

Chennai, Aug 20

The Madras High Court on Wednesday directed the Joint Director of the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) Chennai Zone-I unit to appear before it in connection with a contempt petition filed by film producer Akash Bhaskaran.

The petition was filed after the agency issued a summons to him despite an interim stay already granted by the court in the probe into the alleged Rs 1,000 crore TASMAC liquor scam.

A division bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh and V. Lakshminarayanan expressed displeasure over the agency's conduct.

"There is a limit to everything. The officer was present in the court when the stay order was passed. Despite that, he issued the summons," the judges observed.

When the ED's counsel argued that the issuance of the summons was not intentional but an oversight, the bench curtly replied: "Let him appear so that he might not repeat this oversight again."

It also highlighted the agency's repeated non-compliance. "We directed you to file a counter in the contempt petition. You failed to do so even after several adjournments. We imposed a cost of Rs 30,000. You refused to pay and instead said you would move an appeal against the order imposing cost," the bench remarked.

Senior advocate Vijay Narayan, representing Bhaskaran, pointed out that the ED even filed a plea before the High Court seeking waiver of the cost.

Earlier in the day, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing through video conferencing, sought time to file an appeal against the cost order.

However, the bench insisted that the officer must appear in person.

"Let the officer appear on September 17. You can file an appeal against this order also, if you want," the court said, while adjourning the matter to that date.

The case relates to alleged large-scale corruption in TASMAC operations.

The ED had earlier carried out searches at properties linked to Bhaskaran and businessman Vikram Ravindran, during which documents were seized. However, the High Court subsequently ruled that the ED had no power to lock and seal premises, directed the return of seized documents to Bhaskaran, and restrained the agency from using those materials for further action.

Despite this explicit order, the ED went on to issue a summons to Bhaskaran, prompting the court on July 23 to censure the agency for violating its directions.

The bench had also permitted Bhaskaran to initiate contempt proceedings if required. Acting on this liberty, Bhaskaran filed the present contempt plea, which has now resulted in the court summoning the ED officer to appear before it in September.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
ED's behavior is shocking. When a court gives a stay order, it must be respected. This "oversight" excuse doesn't work at this level. The officer was literally present in court!
M
Michael C
While I support anti-corruption efforts, agencies must follow due process. The rule of law applies to everyone equally, including enforcement agencies.
S
Suresh O
TASMAC scam is huge - Rs 1000 crore! But investigation must be proper. ED should focus on evidence rather than harassing people against court orders.
N
Nisha Z
Refusing to pay ₹30,000 cost and instead filing appeal shows arrogance. Government agencies should set example, not act like they're above everyone else.
A
Aditya G
This is why we need strong judiciary. When executive agencies overstep, courts must step in. Madras HC is doing exactly what's needed to maintain balance of power.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50