A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath said it would pass orders on the application of Virbhadra Singh and Pratibha Singh seeking stay on the provisional attachment order (PAO) of March 23 and the proceedings against them under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the couple, argued that his clients had given an undertaking not to deal in the properties which have been provisionally attached by ED and, therefore, there should have been no apprehension in the minds of the agency that those assets would be disposed of.
He also contended no provisional orders could be passed against them as no charge sheet has been filed in the CBI case against them and the matter involving their income tax returns was pending in the Supreme Court.
He said the basis of passing PAO under PMLA are the Income Tax department's inquiries and investigation "which are under challenge and are not conclusive of any allegation" made against them.
More From This Section
He said the court had stayed further proceedings in the PMLA case against Virbhadra's son and daughter pursuant to provisional attachment of some of their assets and sought a similar order in the instant case.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain, appearing for ED, argued that the stay order in favour of Virbhadra's children was passed as they were not named in the FIR under PMLA, while the couple has been.
ED, in an affidavit filed before the bench, had sought
ED has also said that there is a provision under the PMLA for appeal and the petitioners ought not to have come before the high court.
Singh and his wife have sought stay on the March 23 PAO of ED, besides quashing and setting aside of the same, on the ground that it has "exceeded its jurisdiction".
They have also sought quashing of the April 26 notice issued to them under PMLA.
They have, in their plea, urged the court to quash the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) of October 27, 2015, lodged purportedly under PMLA.