<p>TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee, and his wife Rujira Banerjee have approached the Supreme Court challenging summons issued to them by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case linked to the West Bengal coal scam.</p>.<p>They claimed the agency was trying to "target and fix" them after the party in power (BJP) was trounced at WB Assembly polls. They alleged "political victimisation" by the agency, though they agreed to appear before it in Kolkata.</p>.<p>The ED summoned Banerjee and his wife to appear for questioning on March 21 and 22. </p>.<p>The couple had earlier moved the Delhi High Court, contending that since both are West Bengal residents, they should not be called by the agency to appear before it in the national capital. </p>.<p>On March 11, the high court dismissed their plea. </p>.<p>The couple has moved the apex court challenging the high court order. </p>.<p>Their plea filed through advocate Sunil Fernandes said, “the party to which the Petitioner No.1 (Abhishek) belonged, comprehensively trounced the political party at power in the Centre, thereby giving justifiable cause to “target” and “fix” the petitioner no 1, by misusing the central investigation agencies”. </p>.<p>It further added, “It is not only against the basic principles of territorial jurisdiction, but could also result in absurd consequences and situations wherein the officers of the agency situated in any State in India can summon any person residing in any other state, without any regard to the place of occurrence of offence, or the place of residence of the summoned person”. </p>.<p>The plea said the ED did not even attempt to interrogate the petitioners firstly at Kolkata, and it is still unclear as to what are the impediments that ED will face if it interrogates them at their full-fledged office in Kolkata. </p>.<p>The plea added, “The petitioners’ contention of political victimization is further fortified by the inscrutable and inexplicable insistence of the ED to interrogate the petitioners at their New Delhi office instead of their full-fledged office in Kolkata. The ED seems more interested in causing prejudice to the petitioners herein rather than sincerely and expeditiously investigate the alleged offence”.</p>.<p>The petitioners urged the apex court to stay the high court order and direct ED to summon the petitioners under section 50 PMLA only at Kolkata.</p>.<p><strong>Watch the latest DH Videos here:</strong></p>
<p>TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee, and his wife Rujira Banerjee have approached the Supreme Court challenging summons issued to them by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case linked to the West Bengal coal scam.</p>.<p>They claimed the agency was trying to "target and fix" them after the party in power (BJP) was trounced at WB Assembly polls. They alleged "political victimisation" by the agency, though they agreed to appear before it in Kolkata.</p>.<p>The ED summoned Banerjee and his wife to appear for questioning on March 21 and 22. </p>.<p>The couple had earlier moved the Delhi High Court, contending that since both are West Bengal residents, they should not be called by the agency to appear before it in the national capital. </p>.<p>On March 11, the high court dismissed their plea. </p>.<p>The couple has moved the apex court challenging the high court order. </p>.<p>Their plea filed through advocate Sunil Fernandes said, “the party to which the Petitioner No.1 (Abhishek) belonged, comprehensively trounced the political party at power in the Centre, thereby giving justifiable cause to “target” and “fix” the petitioner no 1, by misusing the central investigation agencies”. </p>.<p>It further added, “It is not only against the basic principles of territorial jurisdiction, but could also result in absurd consequences and situations wherein the officers of the agency situated in any State in India can summon any person residing in any other state, without any regard to the place of occurrence of offence, or the place of residence of the summoned person”. </p>.<p>The plea said the ED did not even attempt to interrogate the petitioners firstly at Kolkata, and it is still unclear as to what are the impediments that ED will face if it interrogates them at their full-fledged office in Kolkata. </p>.<p>The plea added, “The petitioners’ contention of political victimization is further fortified by the inscrutable and inexplicable insistence of the ED to interrogate the petitioners at their New Delhi office instead of their full-fledged office in Kolkata. The ED seems more interested in causing prejudice to the petitioners herein rather than sincerely and expeditiously investigate the alleged offence”.</p>.<p>The petitioners urged the apex court to stay the high court order and direct ED to summon the petitioners under section 50 PMLA only at Kolkata.</p>.<p><strong>Watch the latest DH Videos here:</strong></p>
