The counsel for the accused sought time to file replies to ED’s plea when the case came up for hearing. On this, the ED counsel said there was no requirement of calling for their replies and that all the accused have been duly served with the petition copy. The ED counsel submitted that the accused only wanted to delay the proceedings. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma agreed to grant one week to the accused to furnish their responses. The court posted the matter for resumed hearing on April 2.
Also Read: Excise Case: Delhi High Court grants time to Kejriwal, Sisodia to reply in ED plea against trial court remarks
ED in it’s plea has argued that adverse remarks passed by the trial court disclose a “pre-determined approach wherein observations imbued with notes of finality, have been rendered with respect to the offence of money laundering being investigated by ED, without the court either looking at the evidence gathered by ED or even hearing ED. The said remarks would cause grave prejudice to the case of the Enforcement Directorate under the PMLA“.
