4 min readNew DelhiApr 24, 2025 05:11 AM IST
First published on: Apr 24, 2025 at 03:47 AM IST
The Madras High Court Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government seeking directions to restrain the Enforcement Directorate (ED) from conducting searches in the state without the consent of the state government.
The Tamil Nadu government had filed the plea in connection with a case of money laundering that the central agency had registered against Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC) for the alleged irregularities in sale of liquor in the state.
The agency had conducted searches on the premises of the company, which is wholly owned by the state government, on March 6 and 8. The ED probe is based on over 40 FIRs registered in the matter by the Tamil Nadu Vigilance Department.
TASMAC had in a related petition prayed to court to direct the ED not to harass its officials. The court, which had clubbed the petition with that of the state government and another one, rejected all prayers and directed the ED to go ahead with its probe.
“The argument that there must be a precondition of getting the consent from the state government before conducting searches is completely illogical and bereft of conscience. How can a raid or search be conducted in a state government owned company in a surprise manner if permission is to be obtained beforehand? How can a search by an investigating agency even hold good if such absurd conditions are made? It is against basic principles of the criminal justice system,” the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice K Rajasekar said.
The writ petitions had argued that ED’s power of search and enquiry “in relation to a predicate offence arising out of and within territorial limits of a state without the consent of the concerned state, is violative of basic structure of federalism”.
The court said that “the PMLA operates within its own statutory framework and does not require the consent of the state government to exercise its powers”.
The HC order also said there was a “strong disconnection” between the averments and the relief sought for in the writ petitions.
“The petition alleges that few officers were harassed as they were detained during a search, but the relief sought is to direct the respondents not to enter and conduct searches at any premises of the government of Tamil Nadu. How can such a petition even be maintainable?” the court said.
Calling the argument “alarming”, the court said that “such petitions ought to be dismissed at threshold”.
The court also justified seizure of mobile phones of TASMAC officials during ED searches. “The seizure of mobile phones is directly and inextricably related to the investigation and search under PMLA for the purpose of collection of evidence for gathering material to unearth the offence of money laundering and prosecute the offenders,” it said.
It found the argument of the petitioners that seizure of mobile phones was violative of the Right to Speech as “absurd”. It said this was like saying “impounding of a vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act is violative of the Right to Freedom of Movement.”
The court also rejected allegations of harassment, illegal detention and long duration of questioning by ED officials.
“This submission finds no merit as nowhere has any of the aforementioned officials filed a complaint stating that they were coerced. …How can both the Government of Tamil Nadu and TASMAC file an affidavit stating that such coercion happened when there is no material to prove the same?” the court asked.
The court said that people have to wait for hours and days to get their work done in government departments, but the entire government had come knocking on the court doors because some of its officials had been questioned for a few hours.
The court also rejected allegations of harassment, illegal detention and long duration of questioning by ED officials.
Share
