JUDGMENT

Vipin Sanghi, J. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Moin Akhtar Qureshi through his daughter to seek a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondent Enforcement Directorate (ED) to produce him before the Court and to set aside his illegal arrest vide the arrest memo dated 25.08.2017. He also seeks the quashing of the application dated 16.08.2017 moved by the respondent ED to seek his ED custody remand, and the order dated 26.08.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Patiala House Courts, Delhi on the said remand application on 26.08.2017.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the ED searched his premises on 26.02.2015 in relation to a case involving alleged violation of Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA). The petitioner's statement was recorded in those proceedings on 05.01.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner was served summons dated 05.01.2016 in respect of the case registered under PMLA vide ECIR/18/DLZO/2015/AD requiring him to appear at 4:30 p.m. on the same day for recording his statement under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The petitioner states that he appeared in response to the summons issued in the PMLA case between November 2016 and 16.12.2016.

3. On 16.02.2017, the CBI registered FIR RC No.224/2017 under Section 8, 9, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) and Section 120B IPC against the petitioner, unknown persons and public servants for alleged offences committed during the period 2011-2013.

4. On 15.03.2017, the ED registered another ECIR being No. ECIR/02/DLZO/2017/AD under the PMLA on the basis of the FIR registered by the CBI. The petitioner was summoned to appear before the ED on 25.08.2017, and the petitioner appeared in response to the said summons. He claims that after having been detained for the whole day, he was subsequently arrested on the same day under Section 19 of the PMLA.

5. On 26.08.2017, the petitioner was produced before the learned Special Judge, CBI at 3:00 p.m. when the respondent sought his remand without giving him either a copy of the ECIR, or the grounds of arrest, or even the remand application. Only on the directions of the learned Special Judge issued during the proceedings, he was provided with a copy of the remand application, but not the grounds of arrest, or copy of the ECIR. The learned Special Judge, CBI remanded the petitioner to the custody of the respondent ED till 31.08.2017.

6. Consequently, the petitioner preferred the present writ petition dated 29.08.2017. It was listed before the Court on 30.08.2017 when the respondents appeared through Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC and Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI. They were granted time for filing their reply within five working days, with advance copy to counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was permitted to file the rejoinder within three working days thereafter. The matter was adjourned to 13.09.2017.

7. On 13.09.2017, the matter was further adjourned to 09.10.2017. The petitioner was permitted to file rejoinder to the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent. Counsel for the petitioner made a statement that, in the meantime, the application for regular bail instituted on behalf of the petitioner before the competent court shall not be pressed. The matter was adjourned from time to time thereafter for one or the other reason, and it was directed to be listed on 23.10.2017. Since the roster had changed by then and the matter was part heard, the same was directed to be listed before the same bench on 27.10.2017. On 23.10.2017, counsel for the petitioner also withdrew the statement made before the court on 13.09.2017 that the petitioner shall not apply for regular bail.

8. The matter was released from part heard by the erstwhile bench on 27.10.2017, and the matter was against listed before this court. The arguments in the petition commenced on 07.11.2017. The judgment was reserved on 13.11.2017.

9. The sub