A Ranchi special PMLA court has deferred proceedings on framing charges against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren in an alleged land-linked money laundering case to September 24. The hearing was disrupted by technical difficulties, with Soren directed to appear through video conference at 3 pm. His legal team also raised issues concerning documents collected by the Enforcement Directorate during its investigation. The development follows the Jharkhand High Court’s September 18 decision not to stay proceedings before the special PMLA court.
PMLA Court Defers Charge Framing Against Hemant Soren to September 24
Technical glitches have disrupted proceedings in the alleged land-linked money laundering case against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren, prompting the Ranchi PMLA court to postpone framing of charges.
A Special Prevention of Money Laundering Act court in Ranchi deferred proceedings in the Hemant Soren land scam case on September 21 and set the next hearing for September 24.
The court was scheduled to consider framing charges against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren in an alleged case of illegal land acquisition and money laundering.
Soren has been ordered to appear via video conference at the next hearing on Sept. 24 at 3 p.m., after Monday’s technical difficulties.
A civil court lawyer familiar with the proceedings said a technical server failure had prevented the scheduled appearance and the subsequent process of framing charges.
Advocate General Rohistasya Roy confirmed the September 24 hearing date but declined to comment on the reported technical reasons for Monday’s deferment.
Senior Additional Advocate General Achyut Keshav argued the matter. Soren’s lawyers also flagged issues relating to documents gathered by the Enforcement Directorate during the probe.
Hemant Soren land scam case reaches charge-framing stage
According to an advocate familiar with the case, Soren’s legal team had filed a petition seeking documents that were not relied upon by the Enforcement Directorate ahead of Monday’s proceedings being deferred.
The petition prayed for adjournment of framing of charge till furnishing of those documents but was withdrawn later before the court took up the matter for scheduled hearing.
Unrelied-upon documents generally refer to investigation materials, statements or evidence collected by prosecutors but not used to prove the guilt of the accused.
Access to such material is related to an accused person’s ability to understand evidence and prepare a defence in the course of a fair trial, a lawyer involved in the proceedings said.
The development comes after the Jharkhand High Court on September 18 declined to stay proceedings against Soren before the special PMLA court in Ranchi.
Soren’s challenge to his discharge application was rejected by the High Court, which refused to stay the proceedings pending before the trial court.
The court order said that the observations regarding the request to stay the proceedings were prima facie and ordered the trial court to proceed independently as per law.
Also Read: US TV Networks Halt Trump Coverage After White House CNN Ban
Enforcement Directorate investigation and 8.86-acre property
The case was registered following an Enforcement Directorate probe into alleged fraud in land acquisition and tampering of government records in Ranchi.
The larger probe began with 4.45 acres of defence land in Morabadi in Ranchi, where the investigators alleged a web involving private individuals and government officials.
The probe found alleged tampering of revenue records at Baragain Circle Office involving Revenue Sub-Inspector Bhanu Pratap Prasad and others.
Searches conducted after a survey on 9 February 2023 led to the seizure of eleven trunks with property documents and 17 original registers.
The information received from the investigation was shared with the Jharkhand authorities, which led to the registration of the Sadar Police Station Case No. 272/2023.
Subsequently, the Enforcement Directorate filed ECIR No. RNZO/25/2023 and initiated proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act on the scheduled offences in the underlying case.
During the High Court proceedings, the investigation record quoted that the alleged syndicate possessed 8.86 acres of land at Shanti Nagar, Baragain, Ranchi.
The Enforcement Directorate has alleged that the property was illegally acquired and possessed and, in the course of its investigation, referred to records and statements relating to the alleged control over the property.
Soren’s arrest, bail and ongoing proceedings
Hemant Soren was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on January 31, 2024, in the money-laundering probe, soon after he resigned as Jharkhand chief minister.
Soren got bail from the Jharkhand High Court on June 28, 2024, after which he returned to office as Jharkhand chief minister.
This action involves the formal charging of a criminal defendant, which is a procedural step that takes place before trial and does not in and of itself determine guilt.
The High Court ruling, delivered on September 18, came after Soren moved the court challenging the special court’s earlier rejection of his discharge petition in connection with the alleged 8.86-acre land deal.
The High Court also refused to stay the proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and directed the special court to continue with the case under the relevant law.
The Enforcement Directorate has said the trial can continue without being stalled based on its original prosecution complaint and further investigation can go on.
The special court has also rejected arguments seeking to postpone charge framing because supplementary investigation remains underway, according to recent reporting on the proceedings.
For Sprouts News, the immediate development is the September 24 hearing, when the Ranchi court is expected to revisit the framing of charges against Soren.
The proceedings will determine whether the court moves forward with formally framing charges, while questions surrounding the alleged land acquisition and money laundering remain subject to judicial examination.
The case remains ongoing, and allegations made by investigating authorities have not been established as criminal liability unless proved through the judicial process.
