New Delhi: Any summons the Enforcement Directorate (ED) issues under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) does not naturally result in power to arrest someone, the Delhi high court said on Thursday (October 19).A single-judge bench comprising Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani clarified that the ED’s power to arrest someone falls under a different section of the PMLA.“The power under section 50 of the PMLA to issue summons to a person and to require the production of documents and record statements, which is akin to the powers of a civil court, is different and distinct from the power under section 19 to arrest a person,” the judgment issued by Justice Bhambhani read.“It is clear that the power to arrest does not reside in section 50 nor does it arise as a natural corollary of summons issued under section 50,” the judgment also said.The court added that the ED cannot be restrained from exercising its power to issue summons on the apprehension that its doing so may lead it to arrest someone, and vice versa.“If that is permitted, any and every person summonsed [sic] under section 50 of the PMLA, to produce documents or give a statement on oath, could resist such summons expressing mere apprehension that he may face arrest at the hands of the ED, in exercise of the powers under section 19 of the PMLA,” the court said.“Such a position would be antithetic to the statutory scheme.”But the court went on to say that the authorities could not use section 19 of the PMLA to arrest someone “on their whims and fancies” and must meet three requirements before making an arrest:“Firstly, the Director must entertain a reasonable belief that the person arrested is guilty of an offence under the PMLA, and not under any other enactment;Secondly, the reasons for such belief must be recorded in writing; andThirdly, such belief must be based on material that is in the Director’s possession.”Also Read: How the Enforcement Directorate Has Become an Excessive DirectorateThe Supreme Court held earlier this month that section 19 of the PMLA requires the ED to inform the accused of the grounds of arrest in a written format.Non-compliance with this requirement vitiates an arrest, and entitles the accused to be set free unconditionally.Justice Bhambhani of the Delhi high court also noted in his judgement yesterday that non-compliance with section 19(1) of the PMLA vitiates an arrest and that compliance with section 19(2) “is a solemn function which brooks no exceptions”.The high court was hearing a plea by Ashish Mittal to quash a 2020 ECIR (enforcement case information report, the ED’s version of an FIR) related to the affairs of a company named Educomp Solutions.Mittal said he was apprehensive that the ED would ‘illegally arrest’ him and that he would be made a scapegoat in the case involved.But the court said that as Mittal was not an accused in the case the ED may not subject him to coercive measures.The ED is the Union government’s financial crimes investigation agency.Under the Narendra Modi government, the ED has been granted extraordinary powers through amendments to the PMLA, which critics say allows the agency to be misused to target the BJP’s political opponents.The Supreme Court upheld key provisions of the PMLA in July last year.Its judgement was highly controversial in view of its adverse effects on citizens’ fundamental rights.However, a special bench of the top court on Wednesday (October 18) appeared inclined to consider arguments in favour of referring the court’s July 2022 judgement to a constitution bench of five judges.