2024 (4) TMI 689 - SCH - Money Laundering

Supreme Court Grants District Collectors Extension for ED Appearance, Warns of Strict Consequences for Non-Compliance.

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Versus THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

The SC addressed the non-appearance of District Collectors in response to ED summons under Section 50 of the PMLA. Despite previous non-compliance, the ... Money Laundering - summons issued by the petitioner, ED under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) - HELD THAT:- From the documents produced on record today, it appears that the said respondents – Collectors instead of respecting this Court’s order, did not appear in person and filed their replies to the summons dated 01.03.2024 issued by the ED, stating inter alia that the information and data sought for is maintained by the other executive wings and would be required to be collected from different departments and offices located at various places and the process will require some time. When the Court had passed the order directing them to appear in response to the summons issued by the ED, they were expected to obey the said order and remain present before the ED. By not following the order, they have created an impression that they do not have respect either for the Court, or for the law, much less for the Constitution of India. Such an approach is strongly deprecated. It is directed that the respondents – District Collectors shall remain personally present and appear before the ED on 25.04.2024 and respond to the summons issued under Section 50 of the PMLA in respect of the information /data sought therein, failing which, strict view shall be taken in the matter. List on 06.05.2024 for reporting the compliance. Issues involved: Non-appearance of District Collectors in response to summons u/s 50 of PMLA, request for postponement of appearance due to General Elections, Court's direction for compliance.Non-appearance of District Collectors in response to summons u/s 50 of PMLA:The Supreme Court allowed the application seeking production of additional documents by the respondents. It was noted that the District Collectors had not mentioned their names in the cause titles of their Writ Petitions before the High Court, despite being shown as Petitioner No.3. The Court directed that their names be included in the cause titles of the Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) against their respective designations. The Court had previously stayed the operation and execution of the impugned order and directed the District Collectors to respond to the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). However, the District Collectors did not appear in person and instead filed replies stating the need to collect information from various departments due to their duties related to public order, social welfare schemes, and the upcoming General Elections. Despite the District Collectors' failure to comply with the Court's order, they were given another chance to appear before the ED and respond to the summons by a specified date, with a warning of strict action if they fail to do so.Request for postponement of appearance due to General Elections:The District Collectors sought to postpone their appearance before the ED in response to the summons citing their duties related to the upcoming General Elections in Tamil Nadu. The Court, while deprecating their cavalier approach and lack of respect for the Court's order, acknowledged the need for them to collect the required data and granted them one more chance to appear before the ED after the conclusion of the General Elections. The Court directed the District Collectors to personally appear before the ED on a specified date and respond to the summons issued under Section 50 of the PMLA regarding the information/data sought, emphasizing that strict action would be taken in case of non-compliance.Court's direction for compliance:The Court scheduled a follow-up date for reporting the compliance of the District Collectors with the directive to appear before the ED and respond to the summons under Section 50 of the PMLA. The Court emphasized the importance of respecting its orders and the legal process, warning of consequences for non-compliance with the directions issued.