Paridhi Arya
Published on June 24, 2022 at 15:14 IST
The Bench of Justices Nitin Jamdar and NR Borkar had extended the stay on the investigation in case where businessman Jitendra Navlani was alleged for extorting money from people by posing as official liaison for Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had filed a reply in a Petition filed by ED. ED filed the plea in case which was investigated by the ACB on a complaint made by Senior Shiv Sena politician Sanjay Raut. Sanjay Raut accuses Jitendra Navlani for extorting money.
ACB objected the maintainability of the plea as in FIR ED is not named as accused. ACB submitted that ED is neither accused nor the probing authority and so has no locus standi to file the plea.
The Navlani is alleged to made 58,96,46,108 rupees between 2015 to 2021 by extortion. The ED want the case should be transferred to the CBI but ACB in its reply opposed the prayer and maintainability of the ED’s plea.
The ED submitted in the plea that though ED is not named as accused but public statement shows that state police will not be unbiased in the investigation. This case was registered to threat the ED that if fair investigation conducted by ED then such false case will be registered as many high profile politicians are being investigated by the ED of Maharashtra state.
The ACB replied that ED has no right to file a plea and sought the relief on ground of the injustice in the investigation by state police. The Court should not take any sanction in the case.
ACB further submitted that ED is filing plea when FIR was registered against private individual create doubt about the motive of ED behind restricting the probe and safeguarding their officers.