The Kerala High Court today reserved orders in the bail plea moved by suspended Principal Secretary to the Kerala Chief Minister, M Sivasankar in connection with the gold smuggling case (M Sivasankar v. State, M. Sivasankar v. Customs)..Justice Ashok Menon heard submissions from Sivasankar’s counsel Senior Advocate P Vijayabhanu, Senior Advocate K Ramakumar for the Customs Department, and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju for the Enforcement Directotrate (ED)..The proceedings began with Ramakumar vehemently asserting that the application for anticipatory bail was premature because Sivasankar was not an accused yet. All that had been done so far in the investigations was summoning Sivasankar. A summons could not be equated to an arrest, the Senior Counsel asserted. He argued,"Nowhere has he listed the offences under which he has been accused, he only speaks of torture etc...This is an incomplete application (for anticipatory bail), on which this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction.".Therefore, the application was liable to be dismissed without a discussion on merits, Ramakumar emphatically submitted..Vijayabhanu stated that Sivasankar's apprehensions began his sending of a representative to comply with an ED request for documents was treated as non-compliance. Thereafter, he averred that the Customs attempted to arrest Sivasankar on Friday, when he went to a hospital to receive treatment for a pre-existing health condition. .The former official's apprehensions arose specifically because he did not know what offences he was going to be arrested for, he submitted..The agencies' suspicions about him were founded on likelihoods, Vijayabhanu submitted, as was evidenced from the use of the words "one day" in the complaint filed, instead of a specific day. The complaint against Sivasankar stated that he and Swapna Suresh operated a joint bank locker with the help of the former's Chartered Accountant. The bank locker apparently held proceeds of Suresh's smuggling operations, it was alleged. Senior Advocate Vijayabhanu stated that the Principal Secretary had no knowledge that the money deposited were proceeds of crime, in terms of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act..ASG Raju averred that on account of Sivasankar's influence, he could not be allowed anticipatory bail just yet, as this would hinder the investigation. He revealed that the ED had recovered substantial information that pointed to his complicity in the smuggling and that he was closer to Suresh than he had stated. .The ASG attempted to submit information in a sealed cover to the Court on Sivakumar's complicity. At this point, Vijayabhanu objected to the same, citing the Supreme Court's dictum in Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement..Raju countered that the Court's observations came in the context of that case, and that his sealed cover submission was to prevent tampering and prejudice to the investigation on account of Sivasankar's stature.The ED had reasons to believe that Suresh was merely a face for the smuggling and that Sivasankar was the kingpin, he added..Further opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, Raju cited the nature of the crime and the loss to the exchequer and the Department of Customs. He also argued that Sivasankar was elusive and his replies to questions posed during the interrogation were evasive..Noting that he would have to pronounce a detailed judgment on account of the arguments advanced, Justice Menon reserved his verdict and allowed Sivasankar protection against arrest till then..Sivasankar has been at the centre of a political storm after his purported links to gold smuggling case accused Swapna Suresh came to be known. .Suresh is alleged to have been part of a group accused of smuggling gold through diplomatic channels. She is a former employee at the UAE Consulate, Thiruvanathapuram..Sivasankar has maintained he was acquainted with her during her stint at the UAE Consulate and that he interacted with her in his official capacity..Until the news report about the gold smuggling case appeared, he had no knowledge that Suresh was involved in smuggling gold, he has stated..Sivasankar first filed an application for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in investigations launched against him by the ED. Later on Monday, he unexpected approached the High Court and sought protection from arrest in respect of the investigation launched by the Department of Customs.
The Kerala High Court today reserved orders in the bail plea moved by suspended Principal Secretary to the Kerala Chief Minister, M Sivasankar in connection with the gold smuggling case (M Sivasankar v. State, M. Sivasankar v. Customs)..Justice Ashok Menon heard submissions from Sivasankar’s counsel Senior Advocate P Vijayabhanu, Senior Advocate K Ramakumar for the Customs Department, and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju for the Enforcement Directotrate (ED)..The proceedings began with Ramakumar vehemently asserting that the application for anticipatory bail was premature because Sivasankar was not an accused yet. All that had been done so far in the investigations was summoning Sivasankar. A summons could not be equated to an arrest, the Senior Counsel asserted. He argued,"Nowhere has he listed the offences under which he has been accused, he only speaks of torture etc...This is an incomplete application (for anticipatory bail), on which this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction.".Therefore, the application was liable to be dismissed without a discussion on merits, Ramakumar emphatically submitted..Vijayabhanu stated that Sivasankar's apprehensions began his sending of a representative to comply with an ED request for documents was treated as non-compliance. Thereafter, he averred that the Customs attempted to arrest Sivasankar on Friday, when he went to a hospital to receive treatment for a pre-existing health condition. .The former official's apprehensions arose specifically because he did not know what offences he was going to be arrested for, he submitted..The agencies' suspicions about him were founded on likelihoods, Vijayabhanu submitted, as was evidenced from the use of the words "one day" in the complaint filed, instead of a specific day. The complaint against Sivasankar stated that he and Swapna Suresh operated a joint bank locker with the help of the former's Chartered Accountant. The bank locker apparently held proceeds of Suresh's smuggling operations, it was alleged. Senior Advocate Vijayabhanu stated that the Principal Secretary had no knowledge that the money deposited were proceeds of crime, in terms of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act..ASG Raju averred that on account of Sivasankar's influence, he could not be allowed anticipatory bail just yet, as this would hinder the investigation. He revealed that the ED had recovered substantial information that pointed to his complicity in the smuggling and that he was closer to Suresh than he had stated. .The ASG attempted to submit information in a sealed cover to the Court on Sivakumar's complicity. At this point, Vijayabhanu objected to the same, citing the Supreme Court's dictum in Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement..Raju countered that the Court's observations came in the context of that case, and that his sealed cover submission was to prevent tampering and prejudice to the investigation on account of Sivasankar's stature.The ED had reasons to believe that Suresh was merely a face for the smuggling and that Sivasankar was the kingpin, he added..Further opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, Raju cited the nature of the crime and the loss to the exchequer and the Department of Customs. He also argued that Sivasankar was elusive and his replies to questions posed during the interrogation were evasive..Noting that he would have to pronounce a detailed judgment on account of the arguments advanced, Justice Menon reserved his verdict and allowed Sivasankar protection against arrest till then..Sivasankar has been at the centre of a political storm after his purported links to gold smuggling case accused Swapna Suresh came to be known. .Suresh is alleged to have been part of a group accused of smuggling gold through diplomatic channels. She is a former employee at the UAE Consulate, Thiruvanathapuram..Sivasankar has maintained he was acquainted with her during her stint at the UAE Consulate and that he interacted with her in his official capacity..Until the news report about the gold smuggling case appeared, he had no knowledge that Suresh was involved in smuggling gold, he has stated..Sivasankar first filed an application for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in investigations launched against him by the ED. Later on Monday, he unexpected approached the High Court and sought protection from arrest in respect of the investigation launched by the Department of Customs.