ED claims that DK Shivkumar's appeal of the ECIR against him is unmaintainable.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) released an affidavit opposing the application for an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) filed against him . The petition is indefinite and liable to be dismissed .

New Delhi, November 24, : The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has released an affidavit opposing Karnataka Congress leader DK Shivakumar's request for an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) filed against him, stating that the application is premature and that there is no violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights.According to the affidavit, the petition is indefinite and liable to be dismissed.Nonetheless, the ED made a promise to refrain from taking coercive action until the next hearing date.According to the EDs affidavit, a mere recording of an ECIR by giving a file number does not make a person an accuser.

The issue has been listed for December 2, 2022 by the Division Bench.The petitioner's primary argument is that the Enforcement Directorate is re-investigating the same offence that it had previously investigated in ECIR04HILI2018, and that no coercive action is taken against him until the next date of the summons is made, according to the affidavit.Both ECIRs are based on contradictory facts, according to the petitioner, the allegations in the Income Tax lawsuit and the CBI FIR state that different ways of generating the crime proceeds are used and that the role of different accused persons are acknowledged, meaning that the Petitioner cannot assert that he has already been accused of the same offence.The person summoned is not an accuser at the time of such an investigation, and the present petition is premature, and it is well-established that the courts do not violate the powers of investigating agencies conferred by statutes, according to the affidavit.The present Writ Petition is also inadmissible due to its prematureness and the petitioner cannot even be considered a person alienated in the eyes of law at the time of summons, according to the affidavit, and it would be up to the petitioner to work out his remedy as and when appropriate legal action is taken against him.The Honble Supreme Court also held that the term prosecuted and punished should be used in the sense of prosecuting and punishing.

According to the plea, the investigated investigation by the respondent (ED) in ECIR 2020 is infringing on the constitutional right guaranteed by Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India and Section 300 of the Cr.The petition also demands that the Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who represents Congress leader DK Shivakumar, be notified by the investigation agency and dated to December 15, 2022 for the next hearing.The petition also seeks to prove that Section 13 of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Act, 2009, which included Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act in the PML Act's Schedule, is ultra vires the Constitution of India.The 2nd ECIR found that the petitioner's wealth was derived from a mixture of known sources of income between 2013 and 2018.

According to a plea, the respondent in the first ECIR sought custody of the petitioner primarily in the case of his wealth during his time as the State of Karnataka's Chief Minister and MLA, and later in October 2019 the ED arrested him on suspicion of money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), and later obtained bail in a money laundering lawsuit filed by the Income Tax (IT) department.During the initial probe, the I-T department had allegedly discovered undisclosed and misreported wealth related to Shivakumar.

.
.
.
.