Law Insider India

Legal News, Current Trends and Legal Insight | Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Money Laundering Case: Bombay HC Rejects Plea by Nawab Malik Seeking Interim Relief; Judicial Custody to Continue

2 min read
Nawab Malik Dawood Ibrahim Law Insider

Mitali Palnitkar

Published on: March 15, 2022 at 22:00 IST

The Bombay High Court rejected Nawab Malik’s Plea seeking release from Judicial Custody in relation to a Money Laundering Case involving Underworld don Dawood Ibrahim. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is investigating the Case.

The Bench comprised Justices Prasanna B Varale and Shriram M Modak, gave the Verdict on Interim Relief sought by Malik in a Habeas Corpus Plea seeking his Release. Senior Advocate Amit Desai represented Malik. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh represented Enforcement Directorate.

The Court ruled, “As certain debatable issues are raised, these issues are to be heard at length. Considering the grounds assigned, we are not inclined to grant Reliefs in Interim Applications.”

The Plea filed through Rashmikant & Partners termed Malik’s Arrest, Remand, and the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) as illegal.

Malik said that his continued Detention was illegal and without Jurisdiction, which Entitled him to a Writ of Habeas Corpus and an immediate release.

He further sought to set aside Special PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) Judge’s Order dated February 23, 2022 which Remanded him to Enforcement Directorate Custody for eight days.

Enforcement Directorate opposed the Plea claiming it as not Maintainable. It sought Dismissal of the Plea on the ground that it was Dilatory Tactic used for derailing ongoing Investigation.

Senior Advocate Desai submitted that though there was no predicate Offence, Malik was implicated; the Case was based upon Statements of persons who are not credible; the transactions for which Malik was implicated were at a time when PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002) did not exist; PMLA was applied retrospectively; Personal Liberty shall not be taken away; and that Habeas Corpus was significant for upholding one’s Liberty.

Additional Solicitor General Singh argued that Habeas Corpus is applicable only if the Remand Order is absolutely illegal. Also, the Court needs to find Reasonable Grounds for believing that the Accused is not Guilty or will not Commit an Offence when on Bail. It was also submitted that Enforcement Case Information Report could not be Quashed.

After 3 days of Hearing, the Court had reserved the Verdict on March 11, 2022.

Also read:

A brief study on Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002

What are the different types of Writs?