Is ED scared of us? Tasmac challenges agency’s refusal to share reasons for raid

CHENNAI: “Are you scared we’ll expose you?” Tasmac asked the Directorate of Enforcement in the Madras High Court as the agency refused to disclose the reasons for conducting a search alleging corruption to the tune of Rs 1,000 crore.

A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice K Rajasekar heard the petitions moved by State and Tasmac challenging the raids by ED.

On Wednesday, the ED submitted 41 FIRs, including against the Tasmac employees involved in corrupt practices, stating that based on these cases, the enforcement case information report was registered to conduct the raid. On behalf of the ED, Additional Solicitor General (Supreme Court) SV Raju submitted that mere suspicion that there may be a record in an office about an employee’s corrupt practices was enough for the ED to enter a building to conduct a search.

“If ED finds an employee has taken a bribe, maybe it has passed on to his superior in the head office, or there may be a network. So the enforcement agency can search the head office. The agency may or may not be right, but that’s not a cause for search to be set aside. Is it unfair to suspect?” asked the ASG.

Arguing that reasons to believe was for, how and where to conduct search in an investigation, which was not a matter for judicial scrutiny, he pointed out: “Predicated offence can be served to Tasmac, but reasons for the suspicion of money laundering cannot be given, as it’s not required under law.”

Senior counsel Vikram Chaudhary for Tasmac asked the ED that if it was scared the State would expose the agency if reasons for the search were given. “Reasons to believe that the search is justified should at least be given to Tasmac in redacted form,” he said, and sought the court to direct the ED to share.

Advocate General (AG) PS Raman for the State submitted that due to the draconian nature of the search conducted for three days, the reputation of Tasmac and State was damaged. He stated, “If ED feels evidence of corruption is available in the Tasmac office, why ask the State authority to share information?”

“If there are allegations of corruption, it’s the State’s duty to take care of it, not the ED’s. That’s federalism. Only the lawmakers make it clear that ED cannot step in without a predicate offence,” he added. “If it’s allowed, today it’s Tasmac facing damages, tomorrow it could be TN Cooperative Society or Aavin.”

Since the ED’s submission was not completed, the matter was posted to Thursday for further arguments.