The Evening Wrap: ED files money laundering case against Mahua Moitra

The Enforcement Directorate has filed a money laundering case against TMC leader Mahua Moitra and businessman Darshan Hiranandani in connection with an alleged cash-for-queries scam case, official sources said on April 2. The federal agency filed the enforcement case information report, the ED equivalent of a police FIR, against the two, taking cognisance of a CBI complaint, the sources said. The ED case was registered two-three days ago. It has been probing them under the civil sections of the Foreign Exchange Management Act and has called Moitra and Dubai-based businessman Hiranandani in this case for questioning but they have not disposed till now, citing official engagements. The CBI had last month conducted searches, after filing its FIR, at the premises of Moitra, a former TMC MP from Krishnanagar seat in West Bengal. She has been renominated by the Trinamool Congress led by West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee to contest in the upcoming general elections. The CBI registered an FIR against her and Hiranandani on the directives of Lokpal which has instructed the agency to file its report within six months, CBI officials had said. Lok Sabha had expelled Moitra last December for “unethical conduct”. The former MP has challenged her expulsion in the Supreme Court. Lok Sabha elections: Election Commission transfers 8 DMs, 12 SPs across 5 States The Election Commission of India (ECI) on April 2 issued transfer orders for top officials in five States, namely Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. The poll body also appointed special observers in the states of West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Bihar which have a population of more than 7 crore. Both steps have been taken to ensure a level playing field during the upcoming elections. The decision on the transfers was taken as part of the regular review by the Commission during a meeting chaired by Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar along with Election Commissioners Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, the ECI said in a statement in New Delhi. The officials transferred include District Magistrate of Udaigiri (Assam), DMs and SPs of Bhojpur and Nawada districts (Bihar), SP Deoghar (Jharkhand), DM of Cuttack and Jagatsinghpur, SP of Angul, Behrampur, Khurda, Rourkela and DCP Cuttack and IG Central (Odisha), DM of Krishna, Ananthpuramu, Tirupati districts, SP of Prakasham, Palnadu, Chittoor, Anathpuramu, Nellore districts and IGP Guntur Range (Andhra Pradesh). “Under the directive, all the transferred officials have been asked to hand over the charge to their immediate junior officer and these officers will not be assigned any election duty till completion of the General Elections 2024. The respective state governments have been directed to send a panel of names of IAS and IPS officers to the Commission,” the poll body said. The special observers who are former civil servants with brilliant track records have also been deployed in Andhra Pradesh and Odisha where simultaneous elections to the Assembly are also being held. Apart from this, special Expenditure Observers have also been deployed in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Odisha, the statement said. These observers will be stationed at the state headquarters and if needed, tour sensitive areas. They can seek requisite inputs from time to time from the observers deployed in the parliamentary constituencies, assembly seats or districts, wherever necessary, without interfering in their work. They are also mandated to seek inputs and coordinate with regional heads and nodal officers of various agencies involved in monitoring activities. SBI refuses to disclose SOP for sale, redemption of electoral bonds in RTI reply The State Bank of India (SBI) has refused to disclose its standard operating procedure for the sale and redemption of the electoral bonds that were issued to its authorised branches, citing the exemption given under “commercial confidence”, according to an RTI response. In an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, transparency activist Anjali Bhardwaj sought the details of the standard operating procedure issued to the SBI’s authorised branches on the sale and redemption of the electoral bonds. “Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) of Electoral Bond Scheme-2018 issued to authorised branches from time to time are internal guidelines with regard to sale and redemption of electoral bonds (meant for internal circulation only), which is exempted under section 8(1)(d) of the Right to Information Act,” the response from Kanna Babu, the central public information officer and deputy general manager of the SBI, said on March 30. Section 8(1)(d) of the Act exempts from revelation “information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information”. “It is shocking to note that even after the Supreme Court has struck down the electoral bonds scheme as unconstitutional and explicitly directed and ensured disclosure of all details of the EBs purchased and redeemed, the SBI continues to deny important information about the operation of the electoral bonds scheme,” Bhardwaj said. She said the SOPs would reveal the official instructions governing the particulars of information that were to be stored as well as the form and manner in which information was to be maintained by the bank on the sale and redemption of the electoral bonds. “It is relevant to note that the SBI cited the standard operating procedures in its application dated March 4, when it sought additional time of four months to comply with the Supreme Court’s judgment to disclose the details of the electoral bonds,” she said. Sand mining case: ED can summon ‘any person’ for ‘any information’, Supreme Court tells Tamil Nadu The Supreme Court on April 2 endorsed the sweeping powers of the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), saying the Central agency could call “anybody for any information” even as it castigated four Tamil Nadu District Collectors for failing to appear in person in response to a summons issued to them by the anti-money laundering body. The Tamil Nadu government and the Collectors informed a Bench headed by Justice Bela M. Trivedi that they had written to the ED expressing their inability to appear in person owing to the fact that the General Elections in Tamil Nadu was due on April 19 and they needed more time to collect the information sought by the Central agency about sand mining sites in their respective districts. The Collectors had explained that the information sought was not in their offices, but had to be collected from other branches of the district administration, verified and compiled to be presented before the ED. They had sought time till the end of April. On April 2, the court refused to accept the Collectors’ explanation. Justice Trivedi said their conduct showed scant respect for the Supreme Court’s order on February 27 to appear in person before the ED on whatever date it summoned them. “Such a cavalier approach may land them [District Collectors] in a difficult situation. This court had passed an order on February 27… Their conduct shows that these officers have no respect for this court, the law and much less to the Constitution. Such an approach is strongly deprecated,” Justice Trivedi addressed senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Amit Anand Tiwari, for Tamil Nadu, and senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the four District Collectors of Vellore, Ariyalur, Karur and Tiruchi. Sibal submitted that the officials were still gathering the data for the ED from the various offices. They were also, as District Magistrates, saddled with the responsibility of maintaining law and order and fulfillment of social welfare and social security programmes in their respective jurisdictions. But Justice Trivedi said the Collectors should have respected the top court order of February 27 and appeared before the ED and “said whatever they wanted to say”. Sibal asked what would have been the point of appearing before the ED without the necessary data. He said the Collectors did not also want to disturb the election process. “They [Collectors] are neither witnesses nor accused… Can the ED call anybody like this,” Sibal asked the Bench. “Yes, they can,” Justice Trivedi replied categorically. Sibal said that was not the law “as we understand it”. He said Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) allowed for “authorised agents” to be sent in response to ED summons. Justice Trivedi said 50(2) of the PMLA empowered the ED to summon “any person” whose attendance was considered necessary for giving evidence or production of records in the course of “any investigation or proceeding” under the statute. Section 50(3) mandated that the individual summoned was “bound to attend in person or through authorised agents” and would be required to make truthful statements and produce the required documents. The court ordered the four Collectors to be present in person before the ED on April 25. It listed the case for hearing on May 6. Atishi should provide proof or face action: Delhi BJP chief Delhi BJP chief Virendra Sachdeva on April 2 slammed AAP leader Atishi challenging her to provide details of her allegation that she was approached to join the saffron party or be prepared for a legal action. Addressing a press conference in New Delhi, Sachdeva said that his party will take legal action against Atishi if she fails to provide proof to her claim that the BJP approached her to join it through her close friend. “If Atishi fails to provide details of the person who she claims approached her on our behalf to join the BJP, we will take legal action against her. She can’t put baseless allegations against us and get away with it,” Sachdeva said. Meanwhile, BJP MP Manoj Tiwari demanded an apology from the AAP Minister warning her to be prepared to face legal action if she does not provide proof to her claim. “We want Atishi to tender an apology for making a false allegation against us or provide proof of the person who approached her. We will take legal action if she does not back her claim by this evening,” he said. Earlier in the day, Atishi claimed that the BJP approached her through a “very close” person to join the party or be prepared to be nabbed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) within a month. “I was approached by the BJP through a person very close to me who asked me to join the BJP to save and enhance my political career or I will be arrested within a month,” she said addressing a press conference. Supreme Court asks government why it turned a blind eye when Patanjali ‘tom-tommed’ its wares as panacea during the pandemic The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the government for “shutting its eyes” while Patanjali Ayurved “tom-tommed” its wares as panacea during the COVID-19 pandemic. The court also turned the heat a notch higher on Baba Ramdev, self-styled yoga guru and Patanjali’s co-founder, by threatening him with perjury proceedings on top of the contempt action hanging over him. A Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah told the government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, to file a detailed affidavit to “dispel the impression” that the government machinery, both at the Central and State levels, were complicit with Patanjali. The court asked why the government did not inform the public, especially during the critical months of the pandemic in 2020 and 2021, that the products advertised by Patanjali were supplementary to the main medication. “While the proposed contemnors (Patanjali Ayurved, its managing director Balkrishna, and Baba Ramdev) were going to town saying this was the answer and there was nothing else in modern medical science… why did you choose to keep your eyes shut while they tom-tommed?” Justice Kohli asked Mehta. The court said the proposed contemnors were taking the contempt proceedings “too lightly”. It expressed dissatisfaction with the affidavits filed by Patanjali and Balkrishna, expressing their apologies for publishing misleading advertisements in violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 despite an undertaking given to the apex court on November 21, 2023. The Bench had initiated contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved and Balkrishna on February 27 for violating an assurance that they would refrain from advertising or branding products as “permanent relief” for diseases like obesity, blood pressure, asthma, etc, in violation of the 1954 Act. On November 21, the court had directed the company to not make any “casual statements” to print or electronic media about the efficacy of their medicinal products or indulge in any disparaging statements about other disciplines of medicine such as allopathy. On Tuesday, Justice Kohli said the apologies of the company and its managing director were mere “lip-service”, perfunctory at best. They had even argued that the 1954 law was “archaic”. “So, are you saying that a law need not be complied with because you think it archaic? As long as a law remains a law, it has to be followed,” Justice Kohli addressed senior advocate Vipin Sanghi, for Patanjali Ayurved and Balkrishna. Ramdev was in the courtroom standing behind his counsel, senior advocate Balbir Singh. Balkrishna was beside him. The court had directed their presence in its previous order on March 19. Singh said his client had been unable to file an affidavit in response to the court’s contempt notice to him on March 19. Singh said the affidavit was “ready”, but the yoga guru had come with the hope of personally apologising to the court. “Being a co-founder, you (Ramdev) were well aware of the November 21 order. For you to go like a shot and hold a press conference within 24 hours of the court order shows you were cognisant of it, and you flouted it,” Justice Kohli addressed Singh. On November 21, the apex court had directed the company to not make any “casual statements” to the print or electronic media about the efficacy of their medicinal products or indulge in any disparaging statements about other disciplines of medicine like allopathy. Justice Amanullah said Ramdev showed “absolute defiance” if he had continued to endorse or promote products despite legal advice. “Do you think you can write anything for an apology and get away with it. We are not so magnanimous, especially in contempt cases,” Justice Amanullah told Ramdev’s lawyers. The court also raised questions about certain discrepancies in the affidavit handed over to the Bench by the yoga guru’s legal team. Justice Amanullah told Singh that his client may have to face perjury proceedings. “Be prepared for all consequences,” the judge told the senior lawyer. The court, on Mehta’s suggestion, gave the proposed contemnors a week’s time as a last opportunity to file fresh affidavits in the contempt case. The court listed the case on April 10. The Bench ordered Ramdev and Balkrishna to be present in person on the next date of hearing in court. Poll roundup Andhra Pradesh Congress chief Y.S. Sharmila Reddy will contest the upcoming Lok Sabha election from the Kadapa seat which had been won four times by her late father Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy or YSR, a popular former Chief Minister of undivided Andhra Pradesh. Reddy was one of 17 names in a fresh list of Lok Sabha candidates announced by the Congress on Tuesday. Other prominent candidates included Tariq Anwar from Katihar and Mohammed Jawed from Kishanganj in Bihar, Saptagiri Sankar Ulaka from Koraput in Odisha, and former Union Ministers M.M. Pallam Raju from Kakinada and J.D. Seelam from Bapatla – a seat reserved for a Scheduled Caste candidate – in Andhra Pradesh. The BJP and the Congress on April 2, 2024, released their candidates lists for the Assembly and Lok Sabha elections in Odisha. The BJP has named candidates for 112 out of 147 Assembly seats. The party has retained almost all MLAs in the forthcoming elections and fielded more than 40 new faces in the list of 112 candidates. Three sitting MLAs of Nilagiri, Malkangiri and Brahmagiri Assembly constituencies have been dropped for different reasons. Of the 112 candidates, eight are women. State BJP president Manmohan Samal will be contesting elections from Chandabali Assembly seat in Bhadrak district while former president Kanak Bardhan Singh Deo will contest from the Patnagarh constituency, which he lost in the 2019 Assembly election. In BriefSupreme Court grants bail to Sanjay Singh in excise policy case as ED concedes Aam Aadmi Party leader Sanjay Singh won bail from the Supreme Court on Tuesday in the Delhi liquor policy case, as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) chose to make a tactical withdrawal rather than risk an order from the top court order which may affect the trial later on. After a half day’s hearing, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the ED, told a three-judge Bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna that the Central agency had decided to concede in favour of granting bail to the Rajya Sabha MP, whose custody was no longer necessary. The turnaround came when Justice Khanna pointed out that Singh had been behind bars for six months with no headway made in recovering the proceeds of the alleged crime or any trace of the money trail leading to him. “He has been in custody for six months. We need to know if further custody is required or not,” the Bench, also comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and P.B. Varale, told the ED. Supreme Court closes proceedings on Mukhtar Ansari’s appeal against conviction in case Taking note of Mukhtar Ansari’s death, the Supreme Court on Tuesday closed its proceedings on a plea filed by the jailed gangster-turned-politician against an order of the Allahabad High Court sentencing him to five-year jail term in a 24-year-old case. “The petitioner is no more. The proceedings shall be abated,” said the bench comprising justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal after taking note of the statement that Ansari passed away. On March 28, Ansari died of cardiac arrest at a hospital in Banda in Uttar Pradesh. Last year on October 13, the top court had sought the response of the Uttar Pradesh government on Ansari’s appeal against the high court order. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 02 April 2024 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( ED files money laundering case against Mahua Moitra, Darshan Hiranandani The [Enforcement Directorate has filed a money laundering case against TMC leader Mahua Moitra and businessman Darshan Hiranandani]( in connection with an alleged cash-for-queries scam case, official sources said on April 2. The federal agency filed the enforcement case information report, the ED equivalent of a police FIR, against the two, taking cognisance of a CBI complaint, the sources said. The ED case was registered two-three days ago. It has been probing them under the civil sections of the Foreign Exchange Management Act and has called Moitra and Dubai-based businessman Hiranandani in this case for questioning but they have not disposed till now, citing official engagements. The CBI had last month conducted searches, after filing its FIR, at the premises of Moitra, a former TMC MP from Krishnanagar seat in West Bengal. She has been renominated by the Trinamool Congress led by West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee to contest in the upcoming general elections. The CBI registered an FIR against her and Hiranandani on the directives of Lokpal which has instructed the agency to file its report within six months, CBI officials had said. Lok Sabha had expelled Moitra last December for “unethical conduct”. The former MP has challenged her expulsion in the Supreme Court. Lok Sabha elections: Election Commission transfers 8 DMs, 12 SPs across 5 States The [Election Commission of India (ECI) on April 2 issued transfer orders for top officials in five States, namely Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh](. The poll body also appointed special observers in the states of West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Bihar which have a population of more than 7 crore. Both steps have been taken to ensure a level playing field during the upcoming elections. The decision on the transfers was taken as part of the regular review by the Commission during a meeting chaired by Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar along with Election Commissioners Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, the ECI said in a statement in New Delhi. The officials transferred include District Magistrate of Udaigiri (Assam), DMs and SPs of Bhojpur and Nawada districts (Bihar), SP Deoghar (Jharkhand), DM of Cuttack and Jagatsinghpur, SP of Angul, Behrampur, Khurda, Rourkela and DCP Cuttack and IG Central (Odisha), DM of Krishna, Ananthpuramu, Tirupati districts, SP of Prakasham, Palnadu, Chittoor, Anathpuramu, Nellore districts and IGP Guntur Range (Andhra Pradesh). “Under the directive, all the transferred officials have been asked to hand over the charge to their immediate junior officer and these officers will not be assigned any election duty till completion of the General Elections 2024. The respective state governments have been directed to send a panel of names of IAS and IPS officers to the Commission,” the poll body said. The special observers who are former civil servants with brilliant track records have also been deployed in Andhra Pradesh and Odisha where simultaneous elections to the Assembly are also being held. Apart from this, special Expenditure Observers have also been deployed in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Odisha, the statement said. These observers will be stationed at the state headquarters and if needed, tour sensitive areas. They can seek requisite inputs from time to time from the observers deployed in the parliamentary constituencies, assembly seats or districts, wherever necessary, without interfering in their work. They are also mandated to seek inputs and coordinate with regional heads and nodal officers of various agencies involved in monitoring activities. SBI refuses to disclose SOP for sale, redemption of electoral bonds in RTI reply The [State Bank of India (SBI) has refused to disclose its standard operating procedure for the sale and redemption of the electoral bonds]( that were issued to its authorised branches, citing the exemption given under “commercial confidence”, according to an RTI response. In an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, transparency activist Anjali Bhardwaj sought the details of the standard operating procedure issued to the SBI’s authorised branches on the sale and redemption of the electoral bonds. “Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) of Electoral Bond Scheme-2018 issued to authorised branches from time to time are internal guidelines with regard to sale and redemption of electoral bonds (meant for internal circulation only), which is exempted under section 8(1)(d) of the Right to Information Act,” the response from Kanna Babu, the central public information officer and deputy general manager of the SBI, said on March 30. Section 8(1)(d) of the Act exempts from revelation “information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information”. “It is shocking to note that even after the Supreme Court has struck down the electoral bonds scheme as unconstitutional and explicitly directed and ensured disclosure of all details of the EBs purchased and redeemed, the SBI continues to deny important information about the operation of the electoral bonds scheme,” Bhardwaj said. She said the SOPs would reveal the official instructions governing the particulars of information that were to be stored as well as the form and manner in which information was to be maintained by the bank on the sale and redemption of the electoral bonds. “It is relevant to note that the SBI cited the standard operating procedures in its application dated March 4, when it sought additional time of four months to comply with the Supreme Court’s judgment to disclose the details of the electoral bonds,” she said. Sand mining case: ED can summon ‘any person’ for ‘any information’, Supreme Court tells Tamil Nadu The [Supreme Court on April 2 endorsed the sweeping powers of the Directorate of Enforcement (ED)]( saying the Central agency could call “anybody for any information” even as it castigated four Tamil Nadu District Collectors for failing to appear in person in response to a summons issued to them by the anti-money laundering body. The Tamil Nadu government and the Collectors informed a Bench headed by Justice Bela M. Trivedi that they had written to the ED expressing their inability to appear in person owing to the fact that the General Elections in Tamil Nadu was due on April 19 and they needed more time to collect the information sought by the Central agency about sand mining sites in their respective districts. The Collectors had explained that the information sought was not in their offices, but had to be collected from other branches of the district administration, verified and compiled to be presented before the ED. They had sought time till the end of April. On April 2, the court refused to accept the Collectors’ explanation. Justice Trivedi said their conduct showed scant respect for the Supreme Court’s order on February 27 to appear in person before the ED on whatever date it summoned them. “Such a cavalier approach may land them [District Collectors] in a difficult situation. This court had passed an order on February 27… Their conduct shows that these officers have no respect for this court, the law and much less to the Constitution. Such an approach is strongly deprecated,” Justice Trivedi addressed senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Amit Anand Tiwari, for Tamil Nadu, and senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the four District Collectors of Vellore, Ariyalur, Karur and Tiruchi. Sibal submitted that the officials were still gathering the data for the ED from the various offices. They were also, as District Magistrates, saddled with the responsibility of maintaining law and order and fulfillment of social welfare and social security programmes in their respective jurisdictions. But Justice Trivedi said the Collectors should have respected the top court order of February 27 and appeared before the ED and “said whatever they wanted to say”. Sibal asked what would have been the point of appearing before the ED without the necessary data. He said the Collectors did not also want to disturb the election process. “They [Collectors] are neither witnesses nor accused… Can the ED call anybody like this,” Sibal asked the Bench. “Yes, they can,” Justice Trivedi replied categorically. Sibal said that was not the law “as we understand it”. He said Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) allowed for “authorised agents” to be sent in response to ED summons. Justice Trivedi said 50(2) of the PMLA empowered the ED to summon “any person” whose attendance was considered necessary for giving evidence or production of records in the course of “any investigation or proceeding” under the statute. Section 50(3) mandated that the individual summoned was “bound to attend in person or through authorised agents” and would be required to make truthful statements and produce the required documents. The court ordered the four Collectors to be present in person before the ED on April 25. It listed the case for hearing on May 6. Atishi should provide proof or face action: Delhi BJP chief [Delhi BJP chief Virendra Sachdeva on April 2 slammed AAP leader Atishi]( challenging her to provide details of her allegation that she was approached to join the saffron party or be prepared for a legal action. Addressing a press conference in New Delhi, Sachdeva said that his party will take legal action against Atishi if she fails to provide proof to her claim that the BJP approached her to join it through her close friend. “If Atishi fails to provide details of the person who she claims approached her on our behalf to join the BJP, we will take legal action against her. She can’t put baseless allegations against us and get away with it,” Sachdeva said. Meanwhile, BJP MP Manoj Tiwari demanded an apology from the AAP Minister warning her to be prepared to face legal action if she does not provide proof to her claim. “We want Atishi to tender an apology for making a false allegation against us or provide proof of the person who approached her. We will take legal action if she does not back her claim by this evening,” he said. Earlier in the day, Atishi claimed that the BJP approached her through a “very close” person to join the party or be prepared to be nabbed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) within a month. “I was approached by the BJP through a person very close to me who asked me to join the BJP to save and enhance my political career or I will be arrested within a month,” she said addressing a press conference. Supreme Court asks government why it turned a blind eye when Patanjali ‘tom-tommed’ its wares as panacea during the pandemic [The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the government for “shutting its eyes” while Patanjali Ayurved “tom-tommed” its wares as panacea during the COVID-19 pandemic.]( The court also turned the heat a notch higher on Baba Ramdev, self-styled yoga guru and Patanjali’s co-founder, by threatening him with perjury proceedings on top of the contempt action hanging over him. A Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah told the government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, to file a detailed affidavit to “dispel the impression” that the government machinery, both at the Central and State levels, were complicit with Patanjali. The court asked why the government did not inform the public, especially during the critical months of the pandemic in 2020 and 2021, that the products advertised by Patanjali were supplementary to the main medication. “While the proposed contemnors (Patanjali Ayurved, its managing director Balkrishna, and Baba Ramdev) were going to town saying this was the answer and there was nothing else in modern medical science… why did you choose to keep your eyes shut while they tom-tommed?” Justice Kohli asked Mehta. The court said the proposed contemnors were taking the contempt proceedings “too lightly”. It expressed dissatisfaction with the affidavits filed by Patanjali and Balkrishna, expressing their apologies for publishing misleading advertisements in violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 despite an undertaking given to the apex court on November 21, 2023. The Bench had initiated contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved and Balkrishna on February 27 for violating an assurance that they would refrain from advertising or branding products as “permanent relief” for diseases like obesity, blood pressure, asthma, etc, in violation of the 1954 Act. On November 21, the court had directed the company to not make any “casual statements” to print or electronic media about the efficacy of their medicinal products or indulge in any disparaging statements about other disciplines of medicine such as allopathy. On Tuesday, Justice Kohli said the apologies of the company and its managing director were mere “lip-service”, perfunctory at best. They had even argued that the 1954 law was “archaic”. “So, are you saying that a law need not be complied with because you think it archaic? As long as a law remains a law, it has to be followed,” Justice Kohli addressed senior advocate Vipin Sanghi, for Patanjali Ayurved and Balkrishna. Ramdev was in the courtroom standing behind his counsel, senior advocate Balbir Singh. Balkrishna was beside him. The court had directed their presence in its previous order on March 19. Singh said his client had been unable to file an affidavit in response to the court’s contempt notice to him on March 19. Singh said the affidavit was “ready”, but the yoga guru had come with the hope of personally apologising to the court. “Being a co-founder, you (Ramdev) were well aware of the November 21 order. For you to go like a shot and hold a press conference within 24 hours of the court order shows you were cognisant of it, and you flouted it,” Justice Kohli addressed Singh. On November 21, the apex court had directed the company to not make any “casual statements” to the print or electronic media about the efficacy of their medicinal products or indulge in any disparaging statements about other disciplines of medicine like allopathy. Justice Amanullah said Ramdev showed “absolute defiance” if he had continued to endorse or promote products despite legal advice. “Do you think you can write anything for an apology and get away with it. We are not so magnanimous, especially in contempt cases,” Justice Amanullah told Ramdev’s lawyers. The court also raised questions about certain discrepancies in the affidavit handed over to the Bench by the yoga guru’s legal team. Justice Amanullah told Singh that his client may have to face perjury proceedings. “Be prepared for all consequences,” the judge told the senior lawyer. The court, on Mehta’s suggestion, gave the proposed contemnors a week’s time as a last opportunity to file fresh affidavits in the contempt case. The court listed the case on April 10. The Bench ordered Ramdev and Balkrishna to be present in person on the next date of hearing in court. Poll roundup - Andhra Pradesh Congress chief [Y.S. Sharmila Reddy will contest the upcoming Lok Sabha election from the Kadapa seat]( which had been won four times by her late father Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy or YSR, a popular former Chief Minister of undivided Andhra Pradesh. Reddy was one of 17 names in a fresh list of Lok Sabha candidates announced by the Congress on Tuesday. Other prominent candidates included Tariq Anwar from Katihar and Mohammed Jawed from Kishanganj in Bihar, Saptagiri Sankar Ulaka from Koraput in Odisha, and former Union Ministers M.M. Pallam Raju from Kakinada and J.D. Seelam from Bapatla – a seat reserved for a Scheduled Caste candidate – in Andhra Pradesh. - [The BJP and the Congress on April 2, 2024, released their candidates lists for the Assembly and Lok Sabha elections in Odisha](. The BJP has named candidates for 112 out of 147 Assembly seats. The party has retained almost all MLAs in the forthcoming elections and fielded more than 40 new faces in the list of 112 candidates. Three sitting MLAs of Nilagiri, Malkangiri and Brahmagiri Assembly constituencies have been dropped for different reasons. Of the 112 candidates, eight are women. State BJP president Manmohan Samal will be contesting elections from Chandabali Assembly seat in Bhadrak district while former president Kanak Bardhan Singh Deo will contest from the Patnagarh constituency, which he lost in the 2019 Assembly election. In Brief Supreme Court grants bail to Sanjay Singh in excise policy case as ED concedes Aam Aadmi Party leader [Sanjay Singh won bail from the Supreme Court on Tuesday in the Delhi liquor policy case]( as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) chose to make a tactical withdrawal rather than risk an order from the top court order which may affect the trial later on. After a half day’s hearing, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the ED, told a three-judge Bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna that the Central agency had decided to concede in favour of granting bail to the Rajya Sabha MP, whose custody was no longer necessary. The turnaround came when Justice Khanna pointed out that Singh had been behind bars for six months with no headway made in recovering the proceeds of the alleged crime or any trace of the money trail leading to him. “He has been in custody for six months. We need to know if further custody is required or not,” the Bench, also comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and P.B. Varale, told the ED. Supreme Court closes proceedings on Mukhtar Ansari’s appeal against conviction in case [Taking note of Mukhtar Ansari’s death, the Supreme Court on Tuesday closed its proceedings on a plea filed by the jailed gangster-turned-politician against an order of the Allahabad High Court]( sentencing him to five-year jail term in a 24-year-old case. “The petitioner is no more. The proceedings shall be abated,” said the bench comprising justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal after taking note of the statement that Ansari passed away. On March 28, Ansari died of cardiac arrest at a hospital in Banda in Uttar Pradesh. Last year on October 13, the top court had sought the response of the Uttar Pradesh government on Ansari’s appeal against the high court order. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [Sign up for free]( Today’s Top Picks [[Do India’s Free Trade Agreements with European nations benefit the country? | In Focus podcast] Do India’s Free Trade Agreements with European nations benefit the country? | In Focus podcast]( [[Watch | What are BJP’s chances in Coimbatore?] Watch | What are BJP’s chances in Coimbatore?]( [[Sri Lankan media hit out at Modi’s Katchatheevu remarks] Sri Lankan media hit out at Modi’s Katchatheevu remarks]( [[Eight reasons for Vistara’s massive flight cancellations] Eight reasons for Vistara’s massive flight cancellations]( Copyright© 2024, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [click here]( Manage your newsletter subscription preferences [here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](