'Limit to everything... ': Madras HC summons ED Joint Director in contempt case over TASMAC scam

Chennai, Aug 20 (IANS) The Madras High Court on Wednesday directed the Joint Director of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) Chennai Zone-I unit to appear before it in connection with a contempt petition filed by film producer Akash Bhaskaran.

The petition was filed after the agency issued a summons to him despite an interim stay already granted by the court in the probe into the alleged Rs 1,000 crore TASMAC liquor scam.

A division bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh and V. Lakshminarayanan expressed displeasure over the agency’s conduct.

"There is a limit to everything. The officer was present in the court when the stay order was passed. Despite that, he issued the summons," the judges observed.

When the ED’s counsel argued that the issuance of the summons was not intentional but an oversight, the bench curtly replied: "Let him appear so that he might not repeat this oversight again."

It also highlighted the agency’s repeated non-compliance. "We directed you to file a counter in the contempt petition. You failed to do so even after several adjournments. We imposed a cost of Rs 30,000. You refused to pay and instead said you would move an appeal against the order imposing cost," the bench remarked.

Senior advocate Vijay Narayan, representing Bhaskaran, pointed out that the ED even filed a plea before the High Court seeking waiver of the cost.

Earlier in the day, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing through video conferencing, sought time to file an appeal against the cost order.

However, the bench insisted that the officer must appear in person.

"Let the officer appear on September 17. You can file an appeal against this order also, if you want," the court said, while adjourning the matter to that date.

The case relates to alleged large-scale corruption in TASMAC operations.

The ED had earlier carried out searches at properties linked to Bhaskaran and businessman Vikram Ravindran, during which documents were seized. However, the High Court subsequently ruled that the ED had no power to lock and seal premises, directed the return of seized documents to Bhaskaran, and restrained the agency from using those materials for further action.

Despite this explicit order, the ED went on to issue a summons to Bhaskaran, prompting the court on July 23 to censure the agency for violating its directions.

The bench had also permitted Bhaskaran to initiate contempt proceedings if required. Acting on this liberty, Bhaskaran filed the present contempt plea, which has now resulted in the court summoning the ED officer to appear before it in September.

--IANS

aal/vd