Plea in Bombay HC seeks transparency in enforcement directorates functioning.

A petition was filed in the Bombay High Court stating that there is a lack of transparency in the working of the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

On 16th August, a representation was sent to ED, the petitioner and advocate “Ghanshyam Yadav” said that, there was no communication channel  available for common people to get assistance of any sort.

The petition also stated that, when any investigating agency registers a ‘scheduled offence’, it is under the obligation of the ED under Section 39 of Criminal Procedure act along with Section 176 of the Indian Penal Code to forward a copy of the FIR to ED.

Mr Ghanshyam has further asked the court to direct the adjudication proceedings, as well as the orders relating to attached properties should be posted on the official website of ED.

The plea further states that, there is no right deliberated on citizens on the lines of Section 190 or Section 156(3) of the Criminal procedure act to approach any Court for registration of a crime.

The petition further stated that, if any citizen is a victim of money laundering, he or she can approach the ordinary criminal court but no remedy is provided. The representation referred to letters submitted to ED’s office about Nirav Modi scam that resulted in a loss of over Rs. 13,000 Crores to the Punjab National Bank.

The petition further read that the conduct of ED shows a contemptuous attitude in obtaining assistance from public spirited citizens in its investigation.

The plea further states that out of a few thousand “scheduled offences” that might have arisen, nobody knows as to how the ED chooses its targets and what is the basis of picking up a particular case for investigation.

Lastly, the petitioner stated that, if ED is created for public good, it is quite necessary that people should feel proud about such prime agency and would come forward as whistle-blowers.

Comments are closed.