In an unusual revelation that sparked immediate judicial scrutiny, the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), during a session at the Supreme Court, raised concerns about an affidavit filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) without proper clearance. The statement led to a deeper examination of procedural adherence within the department.
The affidavit in question was related to a bail application and was submitted directly to the court without the customary review process, raising doubts about its validity and the internal processes of the ED. “I personally told the Director to institute a departmental inquiry and ask the officer concerned to remain present in court today,” the ASG disclosed, emphasizing the gravity of the oversight.
Justice Abhay S. Oka, presiding over the bench, was taken aback by the revelations. The ASG expressed his concerns bluntly: “I am sensing something fishy; let me make an inquiry from my side. This type of thing should not happen in the department.”
Further complicating matters, the ASG clarified that the Advocate on Record (AoR), typically responsible for such submissions, was not at fault. “The AoR is not to be blamed; it has come from ED without being vetted by the proper channels,” he stated, redirecting the accountability back to the Enforcement Directorate.
The courtroom, filled with legal professionals and media, buzzed with the implications of these admissions. The incident not only questioned the reliability of the documentation submitted by the ED but also highlighted potential lapses in oversight mechanisms within one of the nation’s key investigative agencies.
In response to the unfolding situation, the court ordered an immediate hold on further proceedings related to the affidavit and scheduled a follow-up hearing to delve deeper into the matter. The judicial body also underscored the necessity for a thorough investigation to ensure such breaches of protocol do not recur, safeguarding the integrity of legal processes.
