‘Witch-hunt’, ‘pick and choose attitude’: What court said on ED arrest of Sanjay Raut

🔴 It is pertinent to note that after such an unusual midnight arrest of Sanjay Raut, and even during the first ED custody period, he was kept in a windowless room where only four walls were around him. [Raut] pointed out that he had undergone angioplasty twice and there are six stents in his heart. He also made a complaint before this court [about] how he was kept in a room where there is absolutely no ventilation… It is only then due to the court intervention he could get a room with some ventilation in ED custody. All this prima facie indicates that his arrest is nothing but witch-hunt and the annihilation of his valuable rights.

🔴 Rakesh and Sarang for their misdeeds and being the main accused persons admitted the same by affidavit of Sarang Wadhawan, were not arrested by the ED but they have been left scot-free. But at the same time, Pravin Raut was arrested for civil dispute, whereas Sanjay Raut for no reason. All this clearly indicates disparity, pick-and-choose attitude of the ED.

🔴 If the Court still accepts contention of ED and MHADA (Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority) and further rejects the bail applications of Pravin Raut and Sanjay Raut that will amount putting premium on such pick and choose strategies of the Agency. Certainly in that event any common man, innocent and honest people, will loose faith and confidence which they have reposed in the judicial system as a temple of justice. Hence, judicial principles which guide the Court cannot be ignored.

🔴 Once the applicant (accused) files bail applications, ED takes at least three to four weeks or more than that to file their reply… in every matter it is noticed that, ED takes very very long time to reply the simple applications filed by any accused.

🔴 In this way, the extra­ordinary pace with which ED arrests accused becomes not even a snail speed in conducting trials. It appears that ED knows only Ss.19 and 45 of the PML Act, but forgets that there is a provision for trial of an offence under PML Act as per Sec.44 thereof.

🔴 Time has come to make ED aware of Section 44 of the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) and this Court is duty bound to do so in view of the oath it has taken to work without fear and without favour.

Welcome banners put up outside Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut’s house after he was granted bail by the court on Wednesday. (Express photo by Deepak Joshi)

🔴 …it is clear how Pravin Raut is arrested for a pure civil litigation, whereas Sanjay Raut for no reason. This truth is glaring. The Court is under legal obligation and duty to find out truth even at the stage of bail. The Hon’ble Supreme Court time and again laid down, “Truth is the guiding star. Criminal trial is voyage of discovery of truth. The truth alone triumphs and every endeavour has to be made by the Court to discover the truth and make justice.”

🔴 Like the laudable object of the PML Act casting duty on the Court to safeguard it, equally the court is protector of rights of accused and innocent persons who are illegally arrested. The Court cannot become predator of such valuable rights of the accused, but is duty bound to be a protector thereof as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. If the Court ignores this aspect, where the people will go for justice?