‘Will Not Interfere’: SC Refuses To Entertain Nawab Malik’s Plea Against Arrest

Maharashtra Minister and NCP leader Nawab Malik

(Photo: PTI)

The Supreme Court on Friday, 22 April, refused to entertain a plea by Maharashtra Minister and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Nawab Malik, urging his release in a money laundering case.

A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant said, "We will not interfere. It is too nascent a stage to interfere...We can't interfere with the due process at this stage."

The bench asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Malik, to move the competent court with the bail application. "The special court can consider the bail application," said the bench.

Sibal vehemently argued that there was no prima facie case, predicate offence, or a First Information Report (FIR) on forgery, and added, "How does Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) be applied?"

'Investigation Is at the Nascent Stage,' Says Court

"How do they arrest me in 2022 for something which happened in 1993...where I am not in the picture at all?" he continued.

Sibal added that the special court was not going to grant his client bail with a 5,000-page charge sheet filed in the matter.

"The Arnab Goswami judgment is in my favour," Sibal submitted

Refusing to entertain Malik's plea, the bench said, "We are not inclined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 when the investigation is at the nascent stage."

The bench clarified that the observation of the high court on merits should not come in the way of parties taking recourse to the rights available under the law.

Malik had moved the top court challenging the Bombay High Court, which declined his interim release in a habeas corpus petition. Malik had claimed that his arrest was completely illegal.

On 15 March, the Bombay High Court rejected Malik's interim application seeking immediate release in a case of money laundering registered against him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Malik was arrested on 23 February based on an FIR against terrorist Dawood Ibrahim and his aides.

The high court held that Malik was arrested by the ED, and subsequently remanded to custody following due process and there was no reason for it to pass any interim order for his release.

Relief Denied

Denying relief to Malik, the high court had said that just because the special PMLA court's order remanding him in custody was not in his favour, it did not make it illegal or wrong.

Malik's plea contended that his petition was strictly on the law, and the high court could not have given a prima facie finding regarding Section 3 of PMLA, without giving reasons.

The ED had alleged that Munira Plumber's prime property in Kurla, worth Rs 300 crore as per the current market value, was usurped by Malik through Solidus Investments Pvt Ltd, a company purportedly owned by his family members. The ED had claimed that this was done in connivance with Dawood's sister Haseena Parkar, her bodyguard Salim Patel, and 1993 bomb blasts convict Sardar Shah Wali Khan.

In his plea in the top court, Malik claimed his arrest was illegal and violated his fundamental rights, as well as statutory provisions, and that he was entitled to the writ of habeas corpus.