HC lets ED proceed against Natwar

The Enforcement Directorate on Friday won the second bout in the Delhi High Court against former External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh...

The Enforcement Directorate ED on Friday won the second bout in the Delhi High Court against former External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh and son Jagat, as the court said that the procedure followed by the agency against the two in the alleged foreign exchange violations in the Iraqi oil-for-food scam case is correct. The court also turned down the demand of the two to access copies of all the documents related to the multi-million dollar scam.

The first round of defeat for the father-son duo came in July 2007 when the High Court had similarly refused to direct the release of 83 documents, in the possession of the ED, including those compiled by the Special Envoy appointed by the Government, Virendra Dayal. Justice B D Ahamed, in his judgment, had then observed that there was no prevalent law in the country, which compels the prosecution to reveal all documentary evidence to the accused, that too, 8220;before the commencement of the inquiry proceedings8221;.

The Singhs had then gone in appeal before a Bench headed by Justice T S Thakur, contending they were indeed entitled to 8220;demand copies of even such documents not relied upon by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the inquiry8221;.

They had primarily sought copies of the Volcker Committee Report on the Oil-for-Food programme of the United Nations in Iraq and report of the Justice R S Pathak inquiry committee on the alleged kickbacks received by many in India.

In their two-pronged challenge against Justice Ahamed8217;s order, the Singhs, through senior counsel Arvind Nigam, argued that a 8220;public authority8221; like the ED was duty-bound to make available 8220;any document in its possession regardless of the fact whether the said document was relied upon or not8221;.

The agency was obliged to afford the Singhs with a 8220;personal hearing before the inquiry8221; itself, Nigam had contended. 8220;The petitioners Singhs were entitled to prove their innocence and demand closure of proceedings on the basis of the documents available with the Enforcement Directorate,8221; the counsel argued.

But the Bench, acknowledging the submissions made by Additional Solicitor General, appearing for ED, construed Singhs8217; claims as 8220;wholly misconceived8221; and agreed that they 8220;could not be allowed to make a roving enquiry8221; into the documents.

Story continues below this ad

The Bench then dismissed Singhs8217; insistence for 8220;disclosure of all documents8221; pertaining to scam as 8220;legally incorrect.8221; It added that Singhs8217; claim for a personal hearing before the commencement of the inquiry was unfounded in law.

Refusing to interfere with the ED8217;s decision to issue showcause notice and start an inquiry against the Singhs, the court observed: 8220;The adjudicating authority had applied its mind to the material placed before it and come to a prima facie conclusion that an inquiry under Section 13 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act FEMA is warranted.8221;

The court observed that 8220;enough material8221; to be relied upon by the ED had already been sent to the Singhs with the show-cause notice.

The court has fixed April 24, 2008 as next date of hearing.