Guwahati: In a setback to the government, the Supreme Court declared today that the extension of Sanjay Kumar Mishra’s tenure as the Chief of the Enforcement Directorate for the third time is illegal.
However, the court has allowed him to continue in his position until July 31, after which the Centre must appoint a new chief for the probe agency, as per the court’s ruling.
The Supreme Court stated that the extension of Mishra’s term violates a judgment passed in 2021, highlighting the need for adherence to legal mandates.
Despite the ruling, Mishra’s tenure has been extended until the end of this month due to concerns expressed by the Centre regarding continuity during a peer review conducted by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), a global terror financing watchdog.
Also Read: Over 130 people from poll violence-hit West Bengal take refuge Assam
The Centre had cited the ongoing peer review as the reason for extending Mishra’s term on previous occasions as well.
In May, the government had informed the Supreme Court that Mishra would retire in November, emphasizing his crucial role as an officer representing the country in a United Nations-like body.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued against interfering with Mishra’s tenure, emphasizing the importance of his oversight in significant money laundering investigations.
Also Read: Assam couple goes missing in Himachal Pradesh amid flood fury
He clarified that Mishra was not irreplaceable and that the peer review, originally scheduled for 2019 but postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is currently taking place in 2023.
A peer review involves an assessment of a country’s efforts to combat terror financing and money laundering, according to officials familiar with the process.
Sanjay Kumar Mishra assumed the position of Chief of the Enforcement Directorate in November 2018 and was initially expected to retire after two years upon reaching the age of 60. However, in November 2020, the government granted him an extension, which was subsequently extended twice.
The Supreme Court stated that the legislature is competent to grant such extensions in the public interest and with adequate justifications provided in writing.
It supported the amendments made to the Central Vigilance Commission Act and the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, which enable the Centre to extend the terms of probe agency chiefs for up to five years.
Mishra’s repeated extensions had drawn strong criticism from the opposition, alleging that the government was exploiting the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to target political adversaries.