Supreme Court Challenges Former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren’s Arrest Amid Money Laundering Allegations

Former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren found himself under the scrutiny of the Supreme Court on Tuesday as questions arose regarding the validity of contesting his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) amidst allegations of money laundering. The apex court highlighted the distinctions between Soren’s case and that of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who was previously granted interim bail in a similar context.

The Supreme Court bench, comprising justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, noted that unlike Kejriwal, Soren’s case involved judicial orders of cognisance and rejection of bail by a Jharkhand trial court. This suggests that prima facie incriminating evidence exists against Soren, as recognized by the trial court.

During the hearing, the bench posed probing questions to Soren’s legal team, led by senior counsel Kapil Sibal, regarding the validity of challenging his arrest despite the trial court’s order. Sibal argued on constitutional principles of liberty, asserting that the order of cognisance should not undermine Soren’s right to contest his arrest.

However, the bench emphasized the significance of the trial court’s findings, stating that it had already reached a conclusion based on prima facie evidence justifying Soren’s arrest. It pointed out that Soren’s subsequent bail plea was also dismissed by the trial court, further indicating the grounds to proceed with the case.

The alleged money laundering case against Soren pertains to a complex scheme involving the illicit acquisition and possession of land in Jharkhand. The ED has accused him of orchestrating fraudulent activities to usurp prime land parcels in Ranchi, using manufactured identities and falsified land records.

In response to Soren’s request for interim bail to campaign in the Lok Sabha elections, the ED opposed it, accusing him of attempting to thwart the ongoing investigation. The agency highlighted Soren’s alleged involvement in the acquisition of properties deemed proceeds of crime and stressed that granting bail would set a precedent for other politicians.

The Supreme Court’s rigorous scrutiny underscores the complexities of Soren’s legal battle and the implications for his ongoing money laundering investigation. As the case unfolds, it raises significant questions about the intersection of legal principles and political accountability in India’s judicial landscape.

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!

Source Link