E-Paper
Jharkhand moves SC challenging HC decision on PILs against Soren
The Jharkhand government on Tuesday urged the Supreme Court for urgent listing of its appeal challenging the high court’s decision to proceed with a petition seeking a probe against chief minister Hemant Soren in alleged irregularities in grant of mining lease.
The Jharkhand government on Tuesday urged the Supreme Court for urgent listing of its appeal challenging the high court’s decision to proceed with a petition seeking a probe against chief minister Hemant Soren in alleged irregularities in grant of mining lease.
The apex court asked the Jharkhand government to approach the court’s registrar for urgent listing of its appeal.
The high court on June 3 accepted the maintainability of two public interest litigations (PILs), which sought a probe by central agencies into alleged irregularities in grant of mining leases by Soren and money laundering by shell companies operated by his family members. “The high court has proceeded to hear the matter on merits,” Jharkhand’s additional advocate general Arunabh Chaudhary informed the apex court.
A bench of justices AS Bopanna and Vikram Nath directed the state government counsel to approach the court’s registrar for listing the matter, saying there are two vacation benches and the discretion lies with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to list the matter. “The CJI has to take a call. You go to the Registrar and give all details. They will take orders from the CJI,” the bench said.
On May 24, the apex court asked the high court to first hear the preliminary objections on the maintainability of the PILs before examining the merits.
“Since the high court has clearly stated on May 13 that it would deal with the issue of maintainability of the petition upfront, it would be appropriate if the high court first decides the said issue,” the Supreme Court said on May 24. “We accordingly direct that the issue as to the maintainability should be first dealt with by the high court on the next date of listing. Based on the outcome of the maintainability of the proceedings, the high court may proceed in accordance with the law.”
The two PILs were filed against Soren and his family members by one Shiv Shankar Sharma on October 21, 2021 and February 16 this year. The first PIL has alleged that Soren, who also heads the state’s mining department, granted a stone mining lease to himself in 2021, which the CM surrendered on February 4 this year.
The Election Commission last month issued notice to Soren seeking his response on the allegations, deemed as a fit ground to disqualify him as a legislator. The PIL asked for a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into the allegations and sought a direction in this regard from the high court.
The state government objected to the PIL claiming that no ED probe could be ordered without a first information report (FIR) containing the allegations leveled by the petitioner. The state further submitted that there is a procedure prescribed for PILs to be entertained under the Jharkhand High Court Rules. In the present case, the state claimed that the PIL did not conform to this procedure.
The second PIL pertains to allegations that Soren and his family members have parked unaccounted money through their associates in shell companies.
Soren has denied the allegations levelled against him. Both state government and Soren appeared before the top court and accused Shiv Shankar Sharma of suppressing vital information in his petition. They also alleged that Sharma failed to disclose that his father testified against the chief minister’s father Shibu Soren in a murder case in 2006. The veteran Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader was acquitted in the murder case.
The state objected to the HC entertaining sealed cover reports submitted by ED in the PIL proceeding. The HC accepted the report and observed during that the matter before it was of “paramount importance, urgency and of public cause”.
ED maintained that the charges are serious and apprehended that if the report submitted by it was to be disclosed, all evidence would be lost. The top court also heard ED before passing its May 24 order. ED represented through solicitor general (SG) Tushar Mehta told the court that the case had multiple dimensions that also involved the alleged embezzlement of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGA) fund involving former divisional commissioner Pooja Singhal, who was also the mining secretary in the state. While probing money laundering charges against Singhal, who was arrested last month, the ED raids discovered sensitive material regarding shell companies and money trails.
The PIL before the HC has mentioned a list of 28 shell companies and ED believed that the materials recovered from Singhal could be linked to some of them.
