Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS)
R. BANUMATHI, A.S. BOPANNA, JJ.
P. CHIDAMBARAM – Petitioner (s)
VERSUS
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – Respondent(s)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 7523 of 2019
Court's Power - Documents Produced by Directorate of Enforcement - Court directed the Directorate of Enforcement to produce documents in a sealed cover for the court's consideration, despite the petitioner not being confronted with the documents during interrogation.
Fact of the Case:
The court heard submissions from the Directorate of Enforcement and the petitioner's counsel regarding whether the court should consider documents produced by the Directorate of Enforcement, despite the petitioner not being confronted with the documents during interrogation.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the Directorate of Enforcement to produce the documents in a sealed cover with the authenticated seal, indicating that the decision to look into the documents would depend on the court's decision. Interim protection granted to the petitioner was to continue until the next hearing.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should consider documents produced by the Directorate of Enforcement, even if the petitioner had not been confronted with the documents during interrogation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the determination that it had the power to look into the documents produced before it, regardless of whether the petitioner had been confronted with the same.
Final Decision: The court directed the Directorate of Enforcement to produce the documents in a sealed cover and granted interim protection to the petitioner until the next hearing.
ORDER
1. We have heard the submission of Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, assisted by Mr. Amit Mahajan, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent-Directorate of Enforcement.
2. We have heard the reply submission of learned senior counsel, Mr. Kapil Sibal and Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, assisted by Mr. Arshdeep Singh Khurana, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner.
3. The arguments were advanced on the question - “Whether the Court is to look into the documents, produced in a sealed cover by the respondent-Directorate of Enforcement, when the petitioner has not been confronted with the said documents during the interrogation on 19.12.2018, 07.01.2019, 21.01.2019 and also on the subsequent dates”.
4. The contention advanced on behalf of the Directorate of Enforcement is that the Court has the power to look into the documents whether or not the petitioner has been confronted or not with the same and in this regard reliance has been placed on number of judgments to substantiate the contention that the Court can always look into the documents produced before it, in order to appreciate the contention.
5. Without prejudice to the contentions of both the parties, we direct the respondent-Directorate of Enforcement to produce the documents in a sealed cover with the authenticated seal of the Directorate of Enforcement.
6. Whether to look into the documents or not will depend upon the decision which this Court would take.
7. List the matter on Thursday, the 05th September, 2019, “For Orders”.
8. Interim protection granted to the petitioner on 23.08.2019 to continue till that date.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
