The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to examine whether the Enforcement Directorate (ED) can file writ petitions before high courts under Article 226 of the Constitution for enforcement of its rights as a ‘juristic person’.
A juristic person is a non-human legal entity recognised by law and entitled to legal rights and duties similar to those of a natural person.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma issued notice to the ED on appeals filed by the Kerala and Tamil Nadu governments, which have challenged a Kerala High Court order upholding the agency’s locus standi to move writ petitions under Article 226.
Article 226 empowers high courts to issue writs for enforcement of fundamental rights and for other legal purposes.
The challenge stems from a September 26, 2024, order of the Kerala High Court, which upheld a single-judge decision staying a judicial inquiry into the ED’s probe of the 2020 gold smuggling case, involving the illegal import of gold through diplomatic channels.
The judicial inquiry commission was constituted by the Kerala government following allegations that ED officials had coerced accused persons to implicate political leaders, including the Chief Minister, in the gold smuggling case.
Dismissing the state government’s appeal against the interim stay, the High Court held that the plea lacked merit and that the single bench had committed no error in entertaining the ED’s writ petition and staying the inquiry.
The case originated from a May 7, 2021, notification issued by the Kerala government ordering a judicial inquiry under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, into allegations against ED officials.
A former High Court judge, Justice V K Mohanan, was appointed to head the inquiry commission. The commission was tasked with examining evidence, including an audio clip allegedly featuring accused Swapna Suresh and a letter written by accused Sandeep Nair, both claiming coercion by ED officers.
An ED Deputy Director subsequently approached the High Court, questioning the state government’s authority to order a judicial inquiry against a central investigating agency. On August 11, 2021, the single bench held that the ED had the right to approach the court and granted an interim stay on the inquiry, prompting the state government to move the appellate bench.
The Supreme Court’s decision to examine the issue is expected to have wider implications on whether central investigative agencies can independently invoke constitutional remedies before high courts.
