New Delhi: The Supreme Court on February 2 refused to entertain a writ petition filed by former Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren, challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate and asked him to approach the Jharkhand high court.A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna, M.M. Sundresh, and Bela M. Trivedi asked Soren’s counsel, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, as to why the matter cannot be heard by the high court, reported LiveLaw. A day ago, a bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud had agreed to list the chief minister’s petition, urgently, today.Sibal, at the apex court today, advocated for the Supreme Court to “send a message” in such matters as this is a sitting chief minister who has been arrested.Arrested in an alleged land scam case, Soren had to relinquish the chief minister’s post late on January 31. While leaders of his party, the Jharkhand Janmukti Morcha, have noted the timing of the arrest – just before the general elections – and called it a brazen act of political vendetta, Soren had expressed fear that his arrest may allow the Union government to impose president’s rule in the state. He has also invoked the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against ED officers for allegedly harassing him.“First, courts are open to everybody. Second, high courts are constitutional courts. If we permit one person to come here, we will have to allow everyone,” Justice Khanna said, according to LiveLaw. The judge also said that the court had refused to entertain Soren’s earlier plea against the ED’s repeated summons to him on the same plank.Soren had, in fact, filed a petition in the Jharkhand high court challenging the ED arrest. When he filed a similar petition at the Supreme Court, his counsel Sibal undertook that he would withdraw the high court petition.Both Sibal and Singhvi attempted to convince the court that it has concurrent jurisdiction in the matter.LiveLaw noted in its report that despite “fervent appeals” the “judges remained unswayed” and spoke in favour of an Article 226 remedy for Soren.Justice Khanna also did not stipulate a timeframe for the high court even upon request. “We are not going to control the high court,” he said.Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, meanwhile, remarked that a common man would never get the benefits of a separate bench.“They are trying to topple this government, that’s a fact,” Sibal said.
