Thaindian News

New Delhi, April 21 (IANS) The Supreme Court Thursday sought the central government’s response to its suggestion for setting up a special investigation team (SIT) with experts from various agencies to probe black money stashed away in tax havens abroad.

The apex court bench of Justice B. Sudershan Reddy and Justice S.S. Nijjar also indicated that it was inclined to appoint a retired judge or chief justice to supervise the SIT investigation and ensure it was carried out in a speedy and co-ordinated manner.

“Everytime it might not be possible for us to meticulously look into every report. We think there can be a (retired) judge or chief Justice to look in it (the status reports) and analyse them before they come to us (the court),” the court said.

“There has to be some one to tell us what is happening and what needs to be done,” the judges said.

The court said the setting up of the SIT was imperative even in view of the difficulties expressed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in its various status reports to the court.

“These (multiple) issues can’t be decided by one agency. We require complete backing of the union of India,” the court said.

The court referred to one of the status report wherein the ED expressed its helplessness in proceeding in the matter as it had approached the home ministry and external affairs and the issue was pending.

The proposed SIT will have officials from the ED, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Intelligence Bureau (IB), the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), police and the ministries of home and external affairs.

The court said that by appointing the SIT “it was not taking away the jurisdiction of any agency currently involved in the investigation”.

The court asked Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium if he thought that the ED could take investigation to its logical conclusion.

When Subramanium indicated that the ED could do that, the court asked: “Are you saying that the ED can track the trail of money laundering which has international dimension (despite the fact that) one does not know whether that is terror money or drug money?”

The solicitor general told the court that he would seek instruction (from the central government) for setting up of the SIT. However, he pleaded that investigating agencies should be given a fair opportunity to carry out the investigation.

Subramanium said that the “overseeing and monitoring of their investigation could come at the second stage”.

“Such a situation would arise if it is found that the agency investigating the matter has not performed as it was expected to do,” the solicitor general said.

The court declined to accept the central government’s suggestion to segregate investigation into money laundering cases.

“You said that different departments were investigating the matter. Till now what these departments were doing. Should we say directly or indirectly that the agencies can’t perform up to the expectation. Till now were these departments sleeping,” asked Justice Nijjar.

The strong observation from the court came in the wake of Subramanium’s submission that the money laundering-related cases could be segregated in three categories.

Subramanium suggested (alleged tax evader) Hasan Ali Khan’s forged passport case could go to the CBI, the Swiss bank UBS AG matter could be entrusted to the banking regulator Reserve Bank Of India (RBI) and the probe into the money laundering issue may be left to the ED.

The investigating agencies had relied on documents attributed to UBS Bank suggesting that Khan was holding assets with UBS AB. However, UBS Bank had described these documents as forged.

The court was told that the CBI investigation into Khan’s forged passport were required as besides Maharashtra, the investigation was required to be done in other states as well.

The court’s observations came during the hearing of a petition filed by jurist Ram Jethmalani seeking directions to the central government to bring back billions of dollars of black money stashed abroad.

The case would be heard next Monday.