In May this year, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) launched an inquiry into TASMAC, a state-run liquor retailer, over an alleged ₹1,000-crore fraud and money-laundering scheme. During the probe, the ED searched the residences of Aakash Baskaran and businessman Vikram Ravindran, seizing items from Baskaran’s home and sealing Ravindran’s. Both challenged these actions before the Madras High Court, asserting that they had no links to TASMAC and that the searches conducted without incriminating evidence violated Section 17 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The ED submitted its justification in a sealed cover. After reviewing it, the High Court found no material connecting the petitioners to the alleged offence and concluded that the authorization dated 15.05.2025 and the search lacked jurisdiction. The Court ordered a halt to further proceedings and directed the ED to return the seized items.
Despite this, the ED issued a notice under Section 8(1) on July 7.
The ED nevertheless continued issuing show-cause notices, prompting Baskaran and Ravindran to file a contempt petition.
Instead of complying with the High Court’s stay, the ED appealed to the Supreme Court. Today, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal at the admission stage, effectively upholding the High Court’s interim protection for the petitioners.
