CHANDIGARH: Punjab Cabinet Minister Sanjeev Arora has approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, contesting his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), deeming it “illegal and unconstitutional.”
This plea was presented to a bench consisting of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, which heard arguments from Arora’s attorney, Puneet Bali, before adjourning the matter to May 14.
The ED arrested Arora on May 9 as part of an investigation into an alleged ₹100-crore GST fraud money laundering case linked to him.
At 62 years old, Arora was detained under PMLA during raids at his official residence in Chandigarh’s Sector 2. He is seeking the court to annul the May 9 remand order issued by a Special Court in Gurugram, which mandated his custody until May 16.
In his plea, Arora asserts that the arrest was “illegal and unconstitutional,” claiming it violated the essential statutory protections outlined in Section 19 of the PMLA and the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 21, and 22.
Represented by senior counsel Puneet Bali along with advocates Vibhav Jain and Viren Sibal, Arora noted that he is a promoter and the former Chairman of Hampton Sky Realty Limited, previously called Ritesh Properties and Industries Limited.
Currently serving as the Cabinet Minister for Industries and Commerce in Punjab, Arora was a member of the Rajya Sabha from 2022 to 2025. He resigned from his position as Chairman and Managing Director of HSRL upon taking public office and has not participated in the company’s daily operations or management since then.
The plea states that HSRL began exporting mobile phones in the financial year 2023-24 as part of its legitimate business expansion. These exports were conducted through a structured, documented process involving authorized suppliers, customs examination, and other compliance measures.
The ED issued search authorizations for Arora’s residence, along with that of Kavya Arora and HSRL’s office, from April 16 to 19, during which no incriminating evidence was found, the plea claims.
Post-search, the ED provisionally attached Arora’s bank accounts, dematerialized assets, and properties for 180 days. An FIR was also registered against him on April 18, based on the ED’s complaint, though he has not received a copy of the FIR as of now.
On May 9, the ED conducted a search at his residence, leading to his arrest under the PMLA. The plea argues that the arrest is “illegal” because the foundational elements of the money laundering offense have not been established.
The transactions in question are fully documented international exports conducted through legitimate banking channels, supported by comprehensive documentation, the plea asserts.
The investigation is primarily documentary, and all pertinent records are already in the possession of the respondents. No incriminating materials were retrieved from Arora, indicating that there was no necessity for custodial interrogation or arrest, it claims.
The plea also states that Arora’s arrest was carried out in a predetermined manner, and the Special Court granted remand without appropriately evaluating the compliance with Section 19 of the PMLA.
