Enforcement Directorate denies leaking details of Mahua Moitra FEMA case to media
The Delhi High Court, which is hearing a petition by the Trinamool Congress leader, will pass its verdict on Friday.
The Enforcement Directorate on Thursday denied before the Delhi High Court that it leaked sensitive or unverified information to the press about its investigation against Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra, reported Live Law.
The central law enforcement agency had on February 15 summoned the former Lok Sabha MP in a case about alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999. Moitra skipped the summons.
In her plea before the Delhi High Court, Moitra alleged that the Enforcement Directorate has compromised the integrity of its investigation by leaking “confidential, half-baked, speculative/unconfirmed information to the media in relation to the ongoing proceedings /investigation”.
Moitra’s plea, according to LiveLaw, also seeks to restrain 19 media houses – who have been made party to the case – from publishing any unverified, unconfirmed, false or derogatory content about the Enforcement Directorate’s investigation.
News reports last week also claimed that the allegations are being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation on a reference from the Lokpal.
Justice Subramonium Prasad, who is hearing the case, will pronounce his verdict on Friday.
The case against the former legislator from West Bengal’s Krishnanagar constituency stems from her expulsion from the Lok Sabha on December 8.
The development came after Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey and advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, Moitra’s estranged partner, accused her of taking bribes from businessman Darshan Hiranandani to ask questions in Parliament.
The Lok Sabha ethics panel found Moitra guilty of “unethical conduct” and contempt of the Lok Sabha for sharing her login user ID and password of the Parliament website with “unauthorised persons”, and accepting gifts in exchange for favours.
Moitra has alleged that the Ethics Committee found her guilty of breaching a code that does not exist. She said that the committee punished her for a practice that is routine, accepted and encouraged in the House.
Also read:
What does the summary expulsion of an Opposition MP say about Parliamentary democracy in India?