Speaking for a bench, justice Ujjal Bhuyan verbally remarked that the conviction rate of ED is very poor. “If it is 60-70%, we can understand. But it is very poor,” he observed.
“If, ultimately, he (the accused) is not convicted, what will happen? Waiting for 2.5-3.0 years (for trial) is not a small period,” justice Bhuyan said.
Adding to this, justice Surya Kant asked the ED counsel: “How long can we keep him? That is the question. Here is a case where more than two years have gone by. How to strike a balance in such a case?”
However, not every act by an investigating agency can be labelled as “mala fide”, justice Kant said, responding to arguments by Chatterjee’s counsel. “It is very easy for a political person to indulge in corruption and then say all this (that the case is mala fide) here,” he observed.If an investigating agency arrests an accused without any delay, then the accused cries foul alleging that he or she has been arrested in a “tearing hurry”, the judge said. Conversely, if the agency takes time to gather evidence, then the accused alleges mala fide intention on the ground of “delay in arrest”, he added.Chatterjee has been in custody for over two-and-a-half years since his arrest on July 23, 2022. Highlighting that the petitioner was aged 73 years, his counsel, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, contended that there was no likelihood of an early completion of the trial, given that there are 183 witnesses and four supplementary prosecution complaints.
ED’s counsel opposed the bail plea, contending that the agency has strong evidence to ensure Chatterjee’s conviction. The bench adjourned the case to Monday seeking details on Chatterjee’s arrest by the CBI in a corruption case and the duration of his police and judicial custody so far.
