In a recent development, Enforcement Directorate has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Jharkhand High Court order vide which bail was granted to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren in a money laundering case related to an alleged land scam.
Prior to Lok Sabha Elections, 2024, Soren had approached the Supreme Court for interim bail, but his plea was not considered.
Soon after, Soren approached the Jharkhand High Court for bail.
The High Court further observed that in Soren's case, the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were satisfied and thus he had to be released.
Aggrieved by this order, the ED has approached the Supreme Court, claiming that the High Court's order is "illegal" and it could not have said that there is no prima facie evidence against Soren.
In a recent development, Enforcement Directorate has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Jharkhand High Court order vide which bail was granted to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren in a money laundering case related to an alleged land scam.It may be recalled that Soren, who was arrested on January 31 this year, is being investigated for money laundering charges in connection with...
In a recent development, Enforcement Directorate has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Jharkhand High Court order vide which bail was granted to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren in a money laundering case related to an alleged land scam.
It may be recalled that Soren, who was arrested on January 31 this year, is being investigated for money laundering charges in connection with an illegal mining case, as well as an alleged land scam in Ranchi, the state's capital. The ED is investigating both cases and contends that approximately 8.5 acres of property in question constitutes proceeds of crime. It has charged Soren with unauthorized possession and usage.
The probe agency alleges Soren's direct involvement in the acquisition, possession, and utilization of these proceeds, accusing him of colluding with others, including Bhanu Pratap Prasad, in concealing original records to portray the acquired property as untainted.
Prior to Lok Sabha Elections, 2024, Soren had approached the Supreme Court for interim bail, but his plea was not considered. During the summer break, a vacation bench of the top Court refused to entertain his petition challenging ED arrest, orally remarking that he had not disclosed facts relating to the Special Court taking cognizance of the complaint filed by ED. The same led to the petition's withdrawal.
Soon after, Soren approached the Jharkhand High Court for bail. After hearing the parties and perusing the record, the High Court held in favor of Soren, observing that there was no evidence directly linking him to the possession of the land in question and ED's statements (that its intervention prevented illegal possession of the land) were ambiguous.
The High Court further observed that in Soren's case, the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were satisfied and thus he had to be released.
"The overall conspectus of the case based on broad probabilities does not specifically or indirectly assign the petitioner to be involved in the acquisition and possession as well as concealment of 8.86 acres of land at Shanti Nagar, Baragain, Ranchi connected to the “proceeds of crime”. None of the registers/revenue records bare imprint of the direct involvement of the petitioner in the acquisition and possession of the said land...The consequence of the findings recorded by this Court satisfies the condition as at Section 45 PMLA, 2002 to the effect that there is “reason to believe” that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence as alleged", said the High Court.
It was also noted that in the numerous registers and revenue records recovered from accused-Bhanu Pratap Prasad's premises, Soren or his family members' names did not appear.
Aggrieved by this order, the ED has approached the Supreme Court, claiming that the High Court's order is "illegal" and it could not have said that there is no prima facie evidence against Soren.
