Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Supreme Court Slams Enforcement Directorate's Lack of Transparency in Recent Judgment

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has strongly criticized the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its lack of transparency in its actions. One of the key issues addressed in the judgment was the failure of the ED to inform the arrested individuals about the second Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) before their arrests. The Supreme Court found this lack of transparency to be problematic and observed, "The way in which the ED recorded the second ECIR immediately after the appellants secured anticipatory bail in relation to the first ECIR... manifests complete and utter lack of bonafides."

The Supreme Court's judgment sheds light on the expectations placed on premier investigating agencies like the ED. It emphasized that these agencies are expected to operate with transparency, fairness, and the highest degree of probity. The ED, which is vested with far-reaching powers under the stringent Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, is expected to act without vindictiveness and maintain the highest standards of fairness.

The case in question involved allegations of abuse of power and vindictive conduct by the ED. The appellants asserted that their arrests were a wanton abuse of power, and the Supreme Court took these allegations seriously. It cited legal precedents, stating that "bad faith which invalidates the exercise of power" includes actions that go beyond the sanctioned purposes of power and are influenced by extraneous considerations.

Moreover, the Supreme Court emphasized that the power to arrest is not mandatory in every case and should only be used when essential for custodial investigation, preventing further offenses, or avoiding tampering with evidence or witnesses. It pointed out that the ED failed to exercise its powers according to these parameters.

The Supreme Court's ruling has broader implications for the conduct of premier investigating agencies in India. It underscores the importance of adhering to the principles of transparency and fairness, especially when dealing with serious economic offenses like money laundering.

This  judgment has brought to the forefront the need for premier investigating agencies to uphold transparency and fairness in their actions. It has set a precedent for the expected standards of conduct for such agencies, with the Supreme Court taking a strong stance against actions that lack bonafides and transparency.

Date of Decision: 3 October 2023

Pankaj Bansal vs Union of India & Ors.

Latest Legal News