Title: Enforcement Directorate Asserts Authority in Senthil Balaji’s Arrest Case
Subtitle: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta Presents Arguments on Behalf of the Enforcement Directorate
Chennai, Date – The ongoing recruitment case filed by Megala, wife of Senthil Balaji, regarding the arrest of her husband was heard for the second day before the third judge CV Karthikeyan. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta presented arguments on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate, stating that the agency has the authority to detain and interrogate the person concerned to determine the validity of the arrest.
The case revolves around the arrest of Senthil Balaji, in which the petitioner argues that the enforcement department does not have the right to conduct investigations. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta refuted these claims, emphasizing that it is the duty of the enforcement department to investigate cases under the Anti-Illicit Money Transfer Act.
The amendment of the law, preceding the enactment of the Anti-Illicit Money Transfer Act, aimed to combat illegal money transfers that were adversely affecting the economies of various nations, in accordance with the UN Convention. The refusal to permit detention and interrogation would be a denial of the enforcement department’s duty to thoroughly investigate the case.
Furthermore, Mehta highlighted that all evidence-gathering activities conducted by the enforcement department are considered as investigations. Since the law stipulates imprisonment of up to two years for officers involved in arrests without proper grounds, only a total of 330 individuals have been arrested under this law since 2005. Moreover, the Enforcement Directorate has successfully recovered and returned INR 19,000 crores to banks in bank fraud cases.
Mehta also emphasized the distinction between arrests made under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, carrying a minimum sentence of seven years, and other laws like the Customs Act, where the punishment is from one year. Due to such differences, the arresting officers possess the power of granting bail in certain acts, but not under the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
Responding to the question of why Senthil Balaji was not taken into custody and interrogated, Mehta emphasized the concerns regarding Balaji’s health. He stated that if anything were to happen to Balaji, who is suffering from health problems, there would be potential controversy. As a result, the Enforcement Directorate approached the Supreme Court in order to address these concerns.
Justice Bharatha Chakraborty has stated in his judgment that all procedures were followed during Senthil Balaji’s arrest. However, Mehta argued that if custody cannot be interrogated within the first 15 days of arrest, it should not be taken into account.
Senior Justice Nisha Banu agreed with the verdict, stating that no one should file a bail application. Instead, it is sufficient to submit a recruitment application. The arguments concluded with Mehta stating that everyone’s heart has approximately 40 percent blockage. The case has been adjourned until July 14 for Megala’s defense to present their arguments.
In conclusion, the Enforcement Directorate continues to assert its authority in the case, arguing for the right to detain and interrogate in order to determine the legality of Senthil Balaji’s arrest. The court hearing will resume on July 14, providing a platform for further discussion and examination of the ongoing case.