'Sooraj Chavan took advantage of political connections to get the contract,' ED tells Bombay High Court.

Denying the allegation of illegal arrest leveled by Shiv Sena (UBT) functionary Suraj Chavan, accused in the Rs 3.68 crore khichdi scam, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) told the Bombay High Court (HC) that his arrest followed Is. For procedural requirements.

He had approached the high court after Chavan was sent to ED custody by a special PMLA court on January 17, taking into account his “active involvement in money laundering”.

The agency said in its affidavit that Chavan played a “key role” in securing the BMC contract through “political connections”. Of the misappropriated amount, Rs 1.35 crore was allegedly deposited in his firm and later invested in laundering the “proceeds of crime”.

Representing the accused, lawyer Harshad Bhadbhade said his arrest was illegal and he was not provided the grounds of arrest in writing as per law. The ED argued that custodial interrogation of Chavan was necessary to uncover the conspiracy and trace the proceeds of crime. The agency highlighted that Chavan's release could lead to tampering of evidence and intimidation of witnesses, which would hamper the ongoing investigation.

Considering the Mumbai Police FIR as a presumptive offense under sections 420 (cheating) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, the ED had registered a case against Chavan under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The agency alleged that Chavan enabled the misappropriation by subcontracting the khichdi distribution work to ineligible entities through his firm Force One Multi Services, which supplied underweight packets. The proceeds of crime, amounting to Rs 1.35 crore, were transferred to Chavan's personal and firm accounts. The ED claimed that this money was used to purchase immovable properties, showing the funds were spotless.

Refuting Chavan's claim that he was not named in the criminal offence, the ED pointed out that Section 3 of the PMLA applies to “whoever” is involved in money laundering. It also rejected Chavan's contention that he was unaware of the allegations, saying he was informed of the “grounds of arrest” and provided a written copy.

ED argues

Chavan was informed about the reasons for his arrest, written copy was provided.

Rs 1.35 crore was embezzled in his company

Investments were later used to launder the proceeds of crime.

Its purpose was to make the fund look spotless