Supreme Court Questions Government's Right to Scan Diplomatic Cargo in Gold Smuggling Case

The Supreme Court seeks clarity on the government's authority to scan diplomatic cargos amid an ongoing gold smuggling investigation involving highly influential accused in Kerala. The Enforcement Directorate is pushing for the trial to be moved outside Kerala, citing attempts to derail the probe.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned whether the Centre is authorized to search cargo with diplomatic immunity. A bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Satish Chandra Sharma made these queries during a hearing on an Enforcement Directorate (ED) petition to transfer a trial from Kerala.

The court sought details about the procedures for scanning diplomatic packages and whether the government has the legal authority to do so. ED counsels responded that they would seek further instructions and provide clarification to the court. The session was then adjourned. The ED had previously filed a plea to move the trial from Kerala's Special Court for PMLA Cases to a similar court in Karnataka.

The Kerala Government opposed the ED's plea, contending that the agency aimed to malign the state's reputation with baseless allegations. The ED cited issues of influence and intimidation by Kerala police officials to derail the investigation. The gold smuggling case dates back to 2020 when Customs seized 30 KG of gold disguised as diplomatic baggage at Trivandrum Airport, revealing a broader smuggling network worth over Rs. 80 crores.

Subsequently, the National Investigation Agency registered cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against key individuals involved. The case also falls under offences scheduled in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), leading the ED to file prosecution complaints in late 2020. The trial is ongoing in Kerala, but the ED argues that influential figures continue to obstruct and derail the proceedings.

The ED claims the investigation is being subverted by the State Police under the influence of a powerful accused, leading to attempts to retract statements and falsify evidence. The agency maintains that moving the trial out of Kerala is crucial to ensuring an unbiased investigation and trial.

(With inputs from agencies.)