Overview

• Extending its May order, a bench of CJI B. R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran restrained the ED from any coercive steps against TASMAC, including searches, seizures and further investigation.
• The judges asked whether the ED’s probe intrudes on the state’s authority to investigate and referenced Section 66(2) of the PMLA on sharing information with state agencies.
• The matter will be heard after the Supreme Court decides pending review petitions on the 2022 Vijay Madanlal judgment, which upheld non‑supply of the ECIR and other ED powers.
• Counsel for Tamil Nadu and TASMAC argued they were denied the ECIR, said state vigilance had filed 47 FIRs, and raised privacy concerns over the seizure of officials’ phones and devices.
• Representing the ED, the ASG said the agency found incriminating material indicating large‑scale laundering, asserted searches were lawful under Section 17, and alleged rapid closure of 37 predicate FIRs to undercut the probe.