The Beginning
Dr Nowhera Shaik’s case is Marked by a series of controversial actions of Enforcement Directorate (ED). Dr Nowhera Shaik and the Heera Group has been facing a lot of problems , due to ED violating Supreme court orders. The legal battle started with a significant rise on December 23, 2019, when the Telangana High Court granted bail to Dr Nowhera Shaik. The reason behind the court order was to make sure a focused & impartial investigation by SFIO, avoiding interference from other agencies that can mess up matters. This order of court was marked by the initial legal victory for Heera Group & Dr Nowhera Shaik.
Petition Filed Against the ED
Dr Nowhera Shaik’s legal team responded by filing a petition against the ED. The petition highlighted many allegations against ED, like manipulating the case and failing to follow Supreme Court orders. Key things were ED failing to obey court orders , illegal seizure of assets and unlawful raids.
On February 4, 2020, the Adjudge under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) confirmed the attachment order. This confirmation was made without considering the Telangana High Court’s orders, as the ED did not reveal the court’s order. This disobedience by the ED was seen as a direct contempt of court, showcasing a intentional non-compliance with judicial instructions.
Clear Contempt Of Court By ED
Even after clear instructions from the Telangana High Court, ED continued to involve itself in the case. On August 16, 2019, before the bail was granted, the ED issued a provisional attachment order against Dr Nowhera Shaik. Rather than transferring the case to SFIO by obeying the court’s order ED still continued to do its own investigation and even did a raid on Dr Nowhera Shaik seized her properties and also Heera Group employees were raided by ED.
Even after the strict order of the Supreme court and Telangana High court restricting other agencies from investigating the case. Still ED seized cash , properties of Dr Nowhera Shaik , assests and documents.
Raids & Seizure Of Dr Nowhera Shaik’s Properties
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is also accused of conducting a raid on Dr.Nowhera Shaik’s properties and those of her associates also and even the the employees of Heera Group. This raid allegedly occurred despite the Supreme Court and Telangana High Court’s orders restricting other agencies from investigating the case. The ED’s actions reportedly involved the seizure of assets, cash, and documents, which Dr.Nowhera Shaik claims were in violation of the court orders and the provisions of the PMLA.
Hon. Supreme Court’s Concerns and Property Dispute
The Supreme Court’s order on March 28, 2023, marked concerns regarding land disputes involving Dr.Nowhera Shaik. The court acknowledged that the buyers were aware of the ongoing disputes but were willing to proceed with their investments. The court indicated that if these buyers deposited around Rs. 641 crores, it would lift the ED’s attachment on the land, leaving the parties to resolve their legal claims independently. Again, the ED allegedly obstructed this process, resulting in encroachments on the property meant to be used for repaying investors. The petitioner argues that these encroachments, occurring under the ED’s watch, represent a serious violation of legal norms and have further complicated the resolution of the case.
Conclusion
The ED’s continuous failure to follow with court orders and its actions that contradict judicial orders resultsin a clear case of contempt. The petition seeks to address these violations by the court and ensure adherence to the legal rulings made by the Telangana High Court and the Supreme Court. There may have been a lack of coordination or communication between the ED and other investigative bodies, leading to actions that did not follow with court orders. Miscommunication or delays in implementing court order could contribute to such issues. Clearly not a cery good example of justice for the people of India.
Sometimes, different judicial bodies and their orders can overlap or conflict, leading to confusion or misalignment in implementing directives. The ED’s actions might reflect a misunderstanding or differing interpretation of overlapping judicial orders.
