<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court</a> has pulled up the ED for using the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to keep an accused in jail and questioned if the provision was "being misused" like the dowry law.</p>.<p>A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation on Wednesday while granting bail to Arun Pati Tripathi, a former excise officer from Chhattisgarh.</p>.<p>The top court expressed surprise at how the accused was kept in custody if a court order taking cognisance of the complaint was quashed by Chhattisgarh High Court.</p>.<p>"The concept of PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) cannot be that a person should remain in jail. If the tendency is to keep the person in jail, even after cognisance is quashed, what can be said? See what happened in 498A cases, PMLA also being misused like that?" the bench asked.</p>.Supreme Court commences hearing on question if courts can modify arbitral awards.<p>Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code protects married women from cruelty by their husbands and their relatives.</p>.<p>During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), opposed the grant of bail, saying crooks could not get away on technical grounds.</p>.<p>Raju submitted cognisance was quashed for lack of sanction and that it was irrelevant for bail.</p>.<p>Expressing dismay, the bench said, "It is shocking that the ED knows the cognisance was quashed, yet this was suppressed. We should summon the officers. The ED must come clean." </p>.<p>"What kind of signals are we giving? Order taking cognisance is quashed and the person is in custody," the top court bench said.</p>.<p>The apex court was hearing an appeal of Tripathi, an Indian Telecom Services officer, challenging a Chhattisgarh High Court order denying him bail in connection with the high-profile liquor scam in the state.</p>.<p>Tripathi, who served on deputation as special secretary and managing director of the Chhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation Limited, was arrested after an ED investigation.</p>.<p>The ED initiated the probe based on a predicate offence registered by the economic offences wing, Raipur, under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act.</p>.<p>The federal agency alleged a criminal syndicate comprising senior government officials, private individuals, and political executives manipulated the state's excise policies to extort illegal earnings from the liquor trade. </p>
<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court</a> has pulled up the ED for using the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to keep an accused in jail and questioned if the provision was "being misused" like the dowry law.</p>.<p>A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation on Wednesday while granting bail to Arun Pati Tripathi, a former excise officer from Chhattisgarh.</p>.<p>The top court expressed surprise at how the accused was kept in custody if a court order taking cognisance of the complaint was quashed by Chhattisgarh High Court.</p>.<p>"The concept of PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) cannot be that a person should remain in jail. If the tendency is to keep the person in jail, even after cognisance is quashed, what can be said? See what happened in 498A cases, PMLA also being misused like that?" the bench asked.</p>.Supreme Court commences hearing on question if courts can modify arbitral awards.<p>Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code protects married women from cruelty by their husbands and their relatives.</p>.<p>During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), opposed the grant of bail, saying crooks could not get away on technical grounds.</p>.<p>Raju submitted cognisance was quashed for lack of sanction and that it was irrelevant for bail.</p>.<p>Expressing dismay, the bench said, "It is shocking that the ED knows the cognisance was quashed, yet this was suppressed. We should summon the officers. The ED must come clean." </p>.<p>"What kind of signals are we giving? Order taking cognisance is quashed and the person is in custody," the top court bench said.</p>.<p>The apex court was hearing an appeal of Tripathi, an Indian Telecom Services officer, challenging a Chhattisgarh High Court order denying him bail in connection with the high-profile liquor scam in the state.</p>.<p>Tripathi, who served on deputation as special secretary and managing director of the Chhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation Limited, was arrested after an ED investigation.</p>.<p>The ED initiated the probe based on a predicate offence registered by the economic offences wing, Raipur, under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act.</p>.<p>The federal agency alleged a criminal syndicate comprising senior government officials, private individuals, and political executives manipulated the state's excise policies to extort illegal earnings from the liquor trade. </p>