INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
CHENNAI: Sparks flew in the Madras high court on Tuesday as Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and former attorney general Mukul Rohatgi debated
before a division bench the legality of Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji's arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on June 14.When
Mehta argued that the ED wasn't required to issue a pre-arrest notice to the minister as it intended to bring him in "from the beginning" on
the basis of the investigation, Rohatgi questioned if the agency had the authority to seek custody of a person
"ED is not police, so it has no authority to seek custody of an accused," he said.Mehta countered that under the PMLA, the ED had the
authority to arrest a person if it believed a particular offence was punishable under that legislation
On the absence of a pre-arrest notice under Section 41 of the CrPC, the solicitor general submitted that there was a distinction between the
power to arrest under PMLA and CrPC
Notice under Section 41 is necessary when the ED does not want to arrest a person, he said.Arrest can be made to prevent destruction of
evidence: SGIn accordance with PMLA provisions, a person can be arrested even to prevent them from destroying the evidence, Solicitor
General Tushar Mehta said.The division bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a habeas corpus
petition filed by Balaji's wife
On completion of 16 hours of arguments by both sides, the bench directed the counsel to submit their written statements by June
28.Responding to questions about the Enforcement Directorate not giving grounds for Balaji's arrest when it took him in custody, Mehta said
the law mandates that this should be cited "as soon as possible, and not immediately during the arrest"
"The grounds of arrest were read out by the sessions judge when she visited the minister in the hospital within 11 hours of arrest," he
pointed out.Insisting that the court must exclude the period of hospitalisation of the minister and consider grant of custodial
interrogation, the solicitor general said, "The conditions imposed by the sessions judge that the minister must be interrogated in the
hospital has made the interrogation an impossibility." Rohatgi said there was no legal provision available to exclude the period of
hospitalisation for granting custodial interrogation
"Even if there was an earthquake or a pandemic, custodial interrogation cannot be granted beyond 15 days of arrest of the accused," he
said.In Balaji's case, the period of 15 days ended on June 28 and, therefore, the Enforcement Directorate cannot request custodial
interrogation at all, he argued
He added that the habeas corpus petition moved by the minister's wife was maintainable since the arrest and remand were "illegal and
