Hemant Soren skips deadline to respond to ED’s seventh summon

Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren skipped responding to the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), which, on December 29, sent him the seventh summons, asking him to decide the date, time, and place for questioning in connection with an ongoing money laundering case related to fraudulent land parcel sales, an official familiar with the matter said on Monday.
“The deadline to respond to the notice was Sunday. We haven’t received any communication as yet,” said a senior ED official on Monday.
The chief minister leader had been instructed by the central agency to inform the investigating officer about his decision. Failing to do so would prompt the ED to initiate further legal action under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the official said.
The ED officials, however, did not disclose their future course of action.
The summons served on Friday marks the seventh by the agency in the past few months.
“Since you have not come to the office of the Directorate of Enforcement in response to the summonses issued to you, we are giving you this last opportunity to record your statement under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, at a place, date, and time mutually convenient to you as well as the undersigned (ED), which should be within seven days of receipt of this notice/Summons,” the ED stated in the summons issued on Friday.
“Despite the issuance of six summonses, you (Hemant Soren) have not appeared before this office, citing unfounded reasons. This non-appearance is impeding and hindering the progress of the investigation in the present case,” the summons read.
The agency previously summoned the chief minister for questioning at its zonal office in Ranchi on August 14, August 24, September 9, September 23, October 4, and December 12.
However, Soren never appeared before the agency, citing different reasons.
The chief minister has labelled the summons as “politically motivated” — a charge the federal agency rejected.
He also approached the Supreme Court and then the Jharkhand high court seeking protection from the ED’s actions, terming the summons “unwarranted”. Both the courts dismissed his petitions.