4 months ago
3
Last year, successful June, erstwhile the Madras High Court stayed each proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) against film-producer Akash Bhaskaran, helium was near successful disbelief but was inactive a relieved man. Just weeks earlier, sections of the media had portrayed him arsenic a cardinal fig successful an alleged “₹1000-crore TASMAC liquor scam”. The ED had raided his location successful May, seized a laptop and mobile phones, and had besides sealed the premises of his associate, Vikram Ravindran. YouTube personalities claimed that investigators had discovered assets specified arsenic luxury watches. The media did not screen itself successful glory by airing visuals of ‘incriminating WhatsApp chat print-outs’ which had been “found thrown out” during 1 of the ED’s searches. Hashtags trended, memes flourished, and governmental opponents quoted ever-expanding figures successful this alleged scam.
All this collapsed the infinitesimal the courts examined the facts. The Madras High Court held that the raids connected Mr. Bhaskaran and Mr. Ravindran were efficaciously illegal, noting that determination was nary credible accusation to nexus them to immoderate scheduled offence, oregon adjacent the alleged Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC) scam. The High Court stayed each proceedings against the 2 men and directed the ED to instrumentality each seized devices and materials to them. It besides held that the bureau had nary authorization to seal premises oregon contented coercive summons successful the lack of a predicate offence. Faced with judicial scrutiny, the ED revoked the hunt authorisation and unsealed the premises. And it tendered an unconditional apology. When the ED attempted to contented caller summons, the Supreme Court of India stepped successful and stayed the broader probe, observing that the ED was “crossing each limits” and violating national principles.
Waywardness and a vague mandate
This is an occurrence that matters. This is due to the fact that it captures a signifier that has go familiar: hunt and apprehension first, analyse later, marque selective leaks to affable media, and past softly retreat erstwhile courts request evidence.
The ED has been entrusted to administer the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, which is meant to forestall criminals from enjoying the proceeds of crime. The operation of the instrumentality is wide successful principle: determination indispensable archetypal beryllium a scheduled offence that generates proceeds of crime.
In practice, the ED has inverted this logic. In galore cases, it treats the money-laundering process arsenic autarkic of an underlying crime, and past proceeds to found a predicate offence to warrant its action.
The ED wields sweeping powers. Under Section 50 of the PMLA, it tin summon anyone and grounds statements nether oath without clarifying whether the idiosyncratic is simply a witnesser oregon an accused. Under Section 17, it tin behaviour searches connected anyone and prehend materials. Under Section 19, it tin apprehension a idiosyncratic without warrant based connected its ain subjective “reason to believe”. It tin provisionally connect property, frost slope accounts and cripple businesses earlier immoderate proceedings begins. To get bail nether the PMLA is notoriously difficult, reversing the presumption of innocence — requiring the accused to beryllium that they person not committed an offence and for the tribunal to beryllium satisfied that they are not apt to perpetrate immoderate offence portion connected bail.
These powers mightiness beryllium defensible if exercised sparingly against panic financing, cause trafficking oregon large-scale organised transgression — arsenic they are meant to be. Instead, these powers are progressively deployed arsenic tools of governmental intimidation.
Section 50 summons are utilized to support radical waiting for hours, unsure of their presumption and creating intelligence unit connected them to comply. There person besides been allegations of carnal battle successful custody. Despite directions by the Supreme Court mandating audio-visual signaling of interrogations, the ED has been accused of lone selectively signaling proceedings, undermining transparency and making judicial reappraisal difficult.
Section 17 searches are conducted connected the flimsiest grounds. Courts person repeatedly held that rumours and vague allegations bash not represent credible information. Yet, the ED has utilized these to warrant raids, adjacent connected state-run institutions.
Section 19 arrests are justified connected the vague grounds of “non-cooperation”, which often means thing but a refusal to endorse the agency’s narrative.
Even erstwhile cases person collapsed, the ED is known not to merchandise attached properties. Assets that were acquired agelong earlier the committee of the alleged offence are held for years.
While the Court’s judgement successful Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union Of India upheld galore of these provisions, the verdict itself is nether review, though nary hearings person been held, leaving citizens exposed to unchecked power.
Corruption and governmental misuse
An bureau entrusted with bonzer powers indispensable by itself beryllium beyond reproach. Over the past fewer years, determination person been cases of galore ED officers having been caught accepting bribes oregon extorting money. In November 2023, an ED serviceman successful Rajasthan was arrested for taking a bribe to dilute a chit-fund case. The adjacent month, an serviceman from the ED’s Madurai sub-zonal bureau successful Tamil Nadu was caught red-handed demanding wealth to driblet a closed case. In August 2024, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) arrested an adjunct manager with the ED for accepting a bribe from a Mumbai-based jeweller. In May 2025, a elder ED serviceman was arrested successful Odisha for demanding crores from a mining businessman. Every time, the ED has responded with suspension orders and property statements, yet nary of these incidents person prompted organization reform.
Claims of motivation authorization ringing hollow erstwhile officers tasked with enforcing fiscal probity themselves indulge successful extortion. Benches of the Supreme Court person openly questioned whether the bureau is utilizing the PMLA to prolong incarceration alternatively than unafraid convictions, and informing that the combat against corruption cannot itself go lawless.
In West Bengal, the ED’s raids connected I-PAC and its ineligible violative against the State Chief Minister, Mamata Banerjee, amusement the aforesaid drift — it raises concerns astir selective investigations being pushed into nationalist presumption up of State elections earlier determination is constitution of coagulated evidence. If the ED tin marque a State Chief Minister arsenic obstructionist, based connected theatre alternatively than facts, what does that accidental astir fairness and the regularisation of law? Therefore, we request to inquire whether specified prosecutorial zeal serves justness oregon governmental impact. The observations by Justice B.V. Nagarathna of the Supreme Court, connected the misuse of Article 32, person highlighted the stark irony successful the ED’s West Bengal case. While the bureau often uses its powers successful a mode seen to beryllium selective and arbitrary, its nonstop invocation of Article 32 underscores a treble standard. This approach, amid Justice Nagarathna’s broader critique of Article 32 being abused for regular oregon trivial grievances, has lone illustrated the organization hypocrisy successful the politicised usage of investigative powers.
The aforesaid template is present disposable successful leaked communications astir Tamil Nadu Minister K.N. Nehru of the DMK. The media has reported connected 2 letters that the ED wrote to the State’s Director General of Police alleging scams. It indispensable beryllium noted that the ED’s letters magnitude to recommendations, not findings. The leaks, however, achieved the desired effect: nationalist suspicion, governmental unit and reputational damage. Whether the allegations past judicial scrutiny remains to beryllium seen, but the signifier is unmistakable.
The request for vigil and checks
What is the takeaway successful each this? First, the media indispensable introspect. Reporting allegations without verification, particularly erstwhile they stem from leaks and interior communications, amounts to complicity. Journalism is not stenography. The work of the property is to measurement extracurricular and verify the truth. Journalists indispensable defy becoming conduits for mendacious and politically-motivated allegations.
Second, scepticism is healthy. The ED’s presumption arsenic a cardinal bureau does not confer infallibility. Its caller grounds reflects overreach, mediocre probe and, astatine times, an outright maltreatment of power. Citizens are entitled to request evidence, not theatrics.
Third, the regularisation of instrumentality matters. Money-laundering statutes beryllium to support the integrity of the fiscal system, but these laws indispensable not go tools of intimidation.
Finally, courts indispensable urgently specify the limits of the ED’s powers and reenforce citizens’ rights. Only steadfast law guardrails tin forestall investigative authorization from mutating into arbitrary authorities power.
This is astir the wellness of India’s democracy. If the CBI was erstwhile described arsenic a caged parrot, the ED contiguous resembles a hound fto loose. Every mendacious oregon anemic lawsuit normalises authoritarian overreach. Every media proceedings erodes religion successful institutions. We indispensable guarantee that the organization rot is reversed.
Saravanan Annadurai is simply a elder lawyer who has appeared successful respective Directorate of Enforcement-related cases, and an authoritative spokesperson for the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)
