SC stays trial in ED case against Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren

THe sublime margaret court on midweek granted respite to Jharkhand chief government minister Hemant Soren by staying the trial proceedings against him in a case lodged by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) over his repeated non-compliance with summons in an alleged land case.The case against Soren was filed under section 174 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that seeks to punish a person who disobeys summons issued by a public servant, in this case summons issued by ED. The case was lodged in 2024 as the ED alleged that Soren refused to turn up for questioning despite issuance of seven summons.A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant issued notice to the ED and held, “Meanwhile proceedings in the case shall be kept in abeyance.” Section 174 IPC carries a maximum sentence of one month simple imprisonment.Also Read: BJP forgot polls promises, but our govt didn’t: Jharkhand CM SorenAt the same time, the court reminded ED to focus on the bulk of complaints being probed against Soren in connection with the alleged cases.The bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Viipul M Pancholi said, “We read in the newspapers that you (ED) have bulk complaints against him. You have to concentrate on that. You will have some constructive outcome.”As regards the present case under section 174 IPC, the bench observed, “These are in terrorem (to coerce the accused) prosecution. Your purpose has been served.”Appearing for Soren, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi along with advocate Pragya Baghel said that the present prosecution was aimed to harass him being the chief minister of a state.“The trial is almost complete. I am getting summons after summons. Why do you want to go against the CM in this manner?”Additional solicitor general (ASG) Anil Kaushik appearing for ED said, “We have issued seven summons. Not even once has he appeared.”The court noted that Soren is already out on bail in the main case related to the alleged land case in connection with which summons were issued.Further, ED submitted that such non-cooperation was hampering the investigation of a serious offence of money laundering, involving proceeds of crime worth several hundred crores of rupees and despite being a public servant, Soren has chosen to remain non-cooperative and reluctant to join the investigation.The summons were issued to Soren in connection with investigation undertaken by ED into landed property acquired by Soren from the alleged proceeds of crime in relation to probe into alleged coal and mining contract scams. The summons required him to provide details of all properties acquired and possessed by him.Soren had approached the top court challenging the refusal by the Jharkhand high court on January 15 to stay the proceedings in the case against him under section 174 IPC including the order of March 4, 2024 of the trial court taking cognisance of the ED complaint.The HC order said, “The undisputed fact remains that the competent authority under the PMLA issued six summons and the seventh is in the shape of a letter to the petitioner and all the summons were received by the petitioner. The petitioner did not appear before the authority concerned, though, undisputedly he was legally bound to attend in person before the concerned officer.”Soren had argued in the HC that he has “justifiable reasons” for not appearing before the officer concerned and that he had sent a reply to each of the summons. The HC said, “In view of the materials available in the record, this is not a case where the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner is to be acceded to at this stage.”