HC allows ED to e-serve plea to accused to save public money

 New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Monday allowed the Enforcement Directorate to serve electronically to 35 accused in its plea against a trial court order in the alleged money laundering case related to the 2021-22 excise policy as it will save public money.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) submitted that approximately Rs 3 lakh will be spent in serving the 1,500-page appeal paperbook to all the accused. Jus-tice Manoj Kumar Ohri allowed the probe agency's application to serve the pe-tition copy to the accused as well as their counsel through electronic mode. The court said in case any accused will seek a physical or legible copy, the request will be considered.

The high court earlier sought response of 40 accused, including AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh, on the ED's plea challeng-ing a trial court's order directing it to supply "unrelied documents" to them in the case. The court had said, "Let the notice be also issued to the remaining unserved respondents through all permissible modes".

The ED approached the court to allow it to serve the remaining 35 accused through the electronic mode. The court had also issued notice on the ED's ap-plication for a stay in the case.

The matter is listed for further hearing on Jan-uary 30 next year. The trial court, in November, had directed the ED to supply the chargesheet and the digitised records of the remaining "unrelied docu-ments" (those which are not used by the prosecution to support their case) to the persons accused in the money laundering case.

Former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh and BRS leader K Kavitha are some of the accused in the case. Several businessmen are also accused in the case. The counsel for ED had contended that the trial court's order was in the teeth of the Supreme Court's decision.

He had said a direction was given by the trial court to the ED at the stage of scrutiny of documents to supply unrelied-upon documents to the accused.

However, according to the apex court's direction, only a list of unrelied-upon documents have to be given at this stage and not the documents, the ED's counsel had argued.