Khichdi scam: Shiv Sena (Uddhav) functionary moves Bombay High Court against ED arrest

The Bombay High Court on Thursday issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a petition filed by Suraj Chavan, a functionary of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray faction), challenging the legality of his arrest and subsequent custody by ED in relation to a money laundering case. .Chavan, reportedly close to Aaditya Thackeray, was apprehended on January 17 in connection with alleged irregularities in the distribution of khichadi to migrant workers by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) during the Covid-19 pandemic.A bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice PK Chavan sought the response of ED to Chavan’s plea and placed the matter for further hearing on November 14. The allegations involve a fraudulent scheme concerning the supply of khichdi to the BMC. Several contractors including Force One Multi Services and Sahyadri Refreshment were awarded work orders to supply khichdi packets at an inflated price of ₹33 per packet (plus GST). .Investigation suggested that these contractors did not meet the necessary eligibility criteria and supplied substandard 100-gram packets instead of the required 300 grams. The FIR alleges that these two companies misappropriated significant public funds, leading to a loss of approximately ₹6.37 crore to the BMC. Chavan is accused of leveraging his political connections to facilitate these contracts..Following his arrest, Chavan contested the ED's remand applications. On January 18, 2024, the ED sought his custody for eight days, which was partly granted by the PMLA court, allowing custody until January 22. The Court subsequently extended Chavan’s custody until January 25. As per Chavan's petition before the High Court, these remand orders were issued without proper justification and in violation of his fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution..In his petition, Chavan has contended that the allegations against him, particularly regarding the supply of insufficient khichdi, lack credible evidence. He has asserted that the charges are based on mere conjecture. Moreover, it is his claim that there were procedural violations and his arrest did not comply with the necessary requirements under the PMLA. Specifically, he was not provided with written reasons to believe he had committed an offence at the time of his arrest, which amounted to a violation of his rights. .He has maintained that he has fully cooperated with the investigation and that there was no necessity for his arrest, as he was never summoned prior to it. Chavan has further pointed out that he was not named as an accused in any scheduled offense under the PMLA and this further invalidates the grounds for his arrest.Hence, he has sought quashing of the arrest order, remand applications, and any related actions taken by the ED on the ground that they were unjustified, arbitrary and executed without proper legal grounds.