Jet Airways: Bombay High Court quashes money laundering case against Naresh Goyal, wife

On February 21, the bench asked the central agency why the case could not be quashed as the court had already set aside the scheduled offence.

In February 2020, the ED took cognisance of an FIR lodged by MRA Marg police station in Mumbai, based on a complaint filed by travel agency Akbar Travels against Jet Airways, Naresh and Anita. In 2021, a closure report was filed in the case and the court accepted it despite the ED’s opposition.

Senior advocates Ravi Kadam and Aabad Ponda, instructed by advocate Ameet Naik of ‘Naik Naik & Co,’ representing the Goyals, said there was no predicate offence, as required for the ED to investigate the ECIR. They added that the police had filed a C-summary (closure) report before the magistrate and the protest plea filed in connection to it by the ED was rejected. The high court and the Supreme Court confirmed the same, they added.

The Goyals said the ECIR “cannot be sustained” with regard to the mandate of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and will have to be quashed as is no predicate offence.

Earlier, advocates Hiten Venegaonkar and Shreeram Shirsat, representing the ED, told the high court that the ECIR could not be quashed as it was “an internal and private piece of paper, which could be considered statutory document” and “same could not have been equated with FIR”.

Ponda had referred to a past Supreme Court order in Parvathi Kollur v State by Enforcement Directorate case, in which Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had said that once the court accepts the closure report against a scheduled offence, the ECIR does not survive and could be quashed.

After going through the Supreme Court order, the high court had asked ED lawyers to take instructions on whether the court could quash an ECIR and asked how their submissions could be contrary to that of the solicitor general, a law officer of the top court.

On Thursday, after Kadam said that “law is clear on the issue,” Shirsat for the ED responded that in view of the Supreme Court verdict, “nothing survives to argue.” However, Shirsat said it should not be recorded as his statement and the court may pass appropriate orders.

Shirsat further said the ED had written to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the commissioner of Mumbai police regarding other cases.

However, the bench responded, “We are not concerned with that (other cases). In view of the Supreme Court order, we will say that ECIR does not survive.”