Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Disdainful Attitude of District Collectors May Land Them into a Difficult Situation: Supreme Court on Non-Compliance with ED Summons

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has expressed its displeasure over the non-compliance of its earlier order by several District Collectors of Tamil Nadu in the matter concerning the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) summons under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The Court observed, “Such cavalier approach and disdainful attitude of the District Collectors may land them into a difficult situation.”

The primary legal point in this judgment revolves around the compliance of the judiciary’s orders and the respect for the legal system. The case centers on the refusal of the District Collectors to adhere to the Supreme Court’s direction to appear in response to the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate.

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) filed Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) against the judgment of the High Court of Madras. The High Court judgment had omitted the names of certain District Collectors, who were summoned by the ED. The Supreme Court, in a previous order dated 27.02.2024, stayed the operation of this judgment and directed the Collectors to respond to the ED summons. However, the District Collectors filed replies excusing their non-compliance, citing engagement in the upcoming General Elections and the need to collect data from various departments.

Compliance with Court Orders: The Supreme Court criticized the non-appearance of the District Collectors before the ED, stating, “By not following the order, they have created an impression that they do not have respect either for the Court, or for the law, much less for the Constitution of India.”

Review of Collectors’ Conduct: The Court described their conduct as a ‘cavalier approach and disdainful attitude,’ which is strongly deprecated.

Consideration of Election Duties: Acknowledging the upcoming General Elections in Tamil Nadu, the Court nonetheless emphasized the importance of complying with its orders.

Granting of Another Opportunity: In view of the pending General Elections, the Court decided to give the District Collectors one more chance to comply with the summons.

The Supreme Court directed the District Collectors to personally appear before the ED on 25.04.2024 and respond to the summons under Section 50 of the PMLA, regarding the information/data sought. The Court warned that failure to comply would result in a strict view being taken against them. The matter is listed for reporting compliance on 06.05.2024.

Date of Decision: 02-04-2024

Directorate of Enforcement v. The State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.

Latest Legal News