SC agrees to list Maharashtra minister Nawab Malik's special leave petition
The probe agency had arrested the state minister on February 23 over a land deal concerning an aide of global terrorist Dawood Ibrahim.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to list the special leave petition filed by Maharashtra Minister and NCP leader Nawab Malik challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2005.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal mentioned the case before the bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana.
"...The act (PMLA) came into place in 2005; the transaction is prior to 2000. A transaction from 22 years ago is sought to proceed," he said.
The probe agency had arrested the state minister on February 23 over a land deal concerning an aide of global terrorist Dawood Ibrahim. He has been under custody ever since his arrest with the Mumbai special court extending his remand from time to time.
The special leave petition was filed challenging a Bombay High Court order that had refused to grant him interim release.
"What we prima facie feel is that projection/claiming a property as untainted property is the objectionable act forming part of an offence under Section 3 of the Act of 2002… We have not gone into the papers of investigation... Considering all the above referred grounds; we are not inclined to allow the prayers in the said applications. Resultantly, Interim Applications are rejected," the Bombay High Court had said in an order dated March 15, 2022 while rejecting the pleas.
The High Court had said that the case failed the twin test for release from custody. Firstly, whether there was a lack of jurisdiction by the Court passing order of custody? And secondly, whether the order passed by the competent Court is patently illegal and shows non-application of mind.
"...In the present case, there is no dispute on the factual aspect that custody order is passed by the competent Court of jurisdiction i.e., the Special Court and secondly, merely because the order is against the Petitioner it cannot be termed as patently illegal or suffers from non-application of mind. In our opinion, this twin test is duly applied in the present matter..." the High Court added in its order.