Supreme Court Stays Criminal Proceedings Against Hemant Soren Over Alleged Non-Compliance With ED Summons

The Supreme Court has stayed the criminal proceedings pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren regarding his alleged failure to comply with multiple summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

The Court was hearing a Special Leave Petition filed assailing the judgment passed by the Jharkhand High Court dismissing the petition filed by Soren under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, seeking to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceedings.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi ordered, "Issue notice. Let it be returnable on...AOR...accepted notice on behalf of the Directorate of Enforcement. Counter affidavit to be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder thereto within two weeks thereafter. Post the matter on such and such date. Meanwhile, further proceedings arising out of the case no. 3952 of 2024 shall be stayed."

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared for Soren, while Advocate Zoheb Hossain appeared for the Enforcement Directorate.

The Supreme Court had refused to interfere in the petition filed by the ED challenging the order granting bail to the Soren by the Jharkhand High Court on June 28, 2024, in a money laundering case.

Rohatgi said, "They all are arrested one after another, the Chief Ministers are arrested, one after the other, one after the other."

Counsel appearing for ED submitted, "Seven summons, not even one he has appeared."

Rohatgi replied, "He appeared thrice, then you arrested him."

Justice Kant said, "We were reading in the newspaper that you have filed bulk complaints...So concentrate your energy... concentrate and spend your energy on those complaints."

Justice Bagchi remarked, "These are in terrorem prosecutions. Your purpose has been served."

Background

The case stemmed from an investigation by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), which was initiated following a predicate offence registered at Ranchi Sadar P.S. The primary accused in the police case, Bhanu Pratap Prasad, was allegedly an associate of the petitioner. Investigations revealed that Prasad had concealed property registers at his residence pertaining to approximately 8.86 acres of land currently in the Soren's possession, alongside other incriminating materials.

To investigate the acquisition and possession of these properties, the ED issued a series of seven summons/notices to the petitioner under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner consistently evaded these summons between the first and sixth instances, providing what the agency termed "frivolous reasons" and characterizing the investigation as "politically motivated." While the seventh notice requested the petitioner to provide a convenient time and place for a statement, the agency maintains that the prior instances constituted a deliberate disregard of legal obligations.

Soren's statement was eventually recorded on January 20, 2024. Following further "vigorous efforts" by the agency, a subsequent statement was recorded on January 31, 2024, leading to the petitioner’s formal arrest under Section 50 of the PMLA. The ED contended that as a public servant, the petitioner was legally bound under Section 50(4) of the Act to attend in person and was intentionally non-cooperative, thereby hampering a high-stakes investigation involving proceeds of crime valued at several hundred crore rupees.

The High Court had held, "That whether a criminal proceeding was malicious or not, is not required to be considered in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C which corresponds to Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and the same is required to be considered at the conclusion of the trial...Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that in view of the materials available in the record, as already discussed in detail in foregoing paragraphs of this judgment, this is not a case where the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this Cr.M.P. is to be acceded to in exercise of its power under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 at this stage."

The High Court had previously allowed Soren an exemption from personal appearance in a case filed under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code, stating that it is a minor offence.

Soren sought bail in connection with a case arising out of an ECIR registered under Section 3 of the PMLA Act, which was pending before the Special Judge, Ranchi.

In May 2024, the Supreme Court had dismissed the plea of Hemant Soren challenging the arrest since the cognizance order by the trial court was not produced before the Bench. After heated arguments with the Bench, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, for Soren withdrew the petition as the Court was not convinced that the order taking cognizance was unintentionally not produced before the Court and because the petitioner did not disclose that he had approached Courts below seeking a similar remedy.

A Special Leave Petition was filed by JMM Leader Soren challenging the order passed on May 3, 2024, by the Jharkhand High Court dismissing his application, which challenged the arrest by the ED in a money laundering case linked to an alleged land scam. On May 17, 2024, the Supreme Court had ordered that the matter be listed before the Vacation Bench and directed the ED to file a reply in the interim bail plea and the petition filed by Soren challenging his arrest by the ED.

Soren had moved the Supreme Court on May 6, 2024, against the Jharkhand High Court order dismissing his application challenging his arrest by the ED in a money laundering case linked to an alleged land scam. On May 10, 2024, the Supreme Court had dismissed the petition for directions to the Jharkhand High Court to pronounce a verdict in the plea filed by the former Jharkhand Chief Minister and Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader Hemant Soren, as the verdict in the said case had been pronounced on May 3.

Hemant Soren had moved the Supreme Court, saying the High Court is not pronouncing the verdict on his plea challenging the arrest by the Enforcement Directorate(ED) in a money laundering case. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had said that the High Court had reserved its verdict on February 28 on his plea, but still no decision has been delivered. Sibal said they had approached the Apex Court against his arrest on February 2, but the bench had asked them to move the High Court for relief.

Cause Title: Hemant Soren v. Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate [SLP (Crl.) 2079 of