SC slams ED for 'inhuman' 15-hour interrogation in illegal mining case

The Supreme Court questioned the Enforcement Directorate's rationale behind the interrogation tactics, while also clarifying that its remarks were limited to bail proceedings, not the case's merits

The Supreme Court has criticised the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its ‘high handedness’ and ‘inhuman conduct’ during an interrogation that lasted nearly 15 hours. A bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih expressed strong disapproval of the ED’s investigative practices, describing the situation as a “shocking state of affairs” and accusing the agency of coercing an individual into making a statement.

 

The court upheld the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision to quash the arrest of former Haryana Congress MLA Surender Panwar in a money laundering case related to illegal mining. Panwar had been arrested by the central agency in July at 1.40 am after undergoing nearly 15 hours of questioning, according to a report by The Times of India.

 

 

In September, the Punjab and Haryana High Court annulled the arrest, prompting the ED to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court. Advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, argued that the High Court had inaccurately noted that Panwar was questioned continuously for 14 hours and 40 minutes. He argued that breaks, including a dinner break, were provided during the interrogation. Hossain also mentioned that the agency had already implemented measures to prevent overnight questioning.

What was SC’s contention with ED?

Rejecting the ED’s arguments, the Supreme Court questioned the rationale behind subjecting an individual to prolonged interrogation without adequate breaks. The Bench clarified that its remarks, as well as those of the High Court, pertained to the bail proceedings and did not address the merits of the case.

 

The High Court, in its order, stated that the petitioner had complied with a summons to appear at the ED’s zonal office in Gurgugram at 11 am, where he was interrogated until 1.40 am the following day. The court criticised this conduct, stating it was “against the dignity of a human being” and far from commendable on the ED’s part.

 

Citing Article 21 of the Constitution, the high court emphasised the need for remedial measures and urged the ED to set reasonable time limits for interrogations. It further recommended establishing a mechanism to ensure fair and humane treatment during investigations, in alignment with basic human rights standards outlined by the United Nations.

SC raps ED over questioning tactics

The apex court supported these observations, labelling the ED’s behaviour as “inhuman” and inappropriate for a case involving illegal sand mining. It noted that such treatment was unwarranted, adding, “You are forcing a person to make a statement.”

 

The apex court ultimately upheld the high court's order, deeming Panwar’s arrest legally unsustainable. It concluded that the ED lacked evidence to demonstrate the former MLA’s involvement, directly or indirectly, in any activity linked to the proceeds of crime.

 

Following the verdict, the ED issued guidelines instructing its officials to avoid late-night questioning and to ensure that individuals are not made to wait excessively at its offices.

 

[With agency inputs]