SC Upholds Madras High Court Relief to Aakash Baskaran and Vikram Ravindran

 With this dismissal at the admission stage, the High Court’s stay order and directions to return seized materials remain fully effective. The decision has emerged as a significant public-interest development in ongoing national and international news discussions around investigative oversight and judicial scrutiny.

TASMAC probe: ED’s raids and the petitioners’ challenge

The case stems from ED’s May 2025 investigation into an alleged ₹1,000-crore fraud and money laundering linked to Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC). As part of the probe, ED conducted raids at the residence of Aakash Baskaran, seizing certain items, and sealed the house of his associate, businessman Vikram Ravindran.
The duo approached the Madras High Court, asserting that they had no links to the TASMAC matter and that the agency had conducted searches without any incriminating material or legally sustainable “reason to believe” as mandated under Section 17 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

High Court finds no link in ED’s sealed-cover explanation

The High Court directed ED to submit its justification, which the agency filed in a sealed cover. After examining the documents, the Court noted that none of the material presented had any connection to the petitioners. It concluded that the authorisation dated 15 May 2025 and the subsequent search were without jurisdiction.
The Court granted an interim stay on further proceedings and ordered the return of the seized items, marking a major setback for the agency.

Violation of court orders and judicial displeasure

Despite the stay, ED issued a notice under Section 8(1) on 7 July, prompting the petitioners to bring the violation to the Court’s attention. ED attempted to describe the issuance of the notice as an inadvertent mistake, but the High Court expressed strong displeasure. After the agency repeatedly failed to file a counter affidavit, the Court imposed a cost of ₹30,000, directing it to be paid to the Chief Justice Relief Fund.
In a further breach, a show-cause notice was issued by the Adjudicating Authority, leading the petitioners to file a contempt petition before the High Court.

Supreme Court dismisses ED’s challenge

Instead of complying with the High Court’s stay, ED appealed to the Supreme Court. When the matter came up for hearing today, the apex court dismissed the petition at the threshold, reinforcing the High Court’s findings and restoring full protection to the petitioners.
This ruling is being seen as another crucial moment in today’s trending news and India updates, highlighting the judiciary’s firm stance on procedural fairness and legal compliance by investigative agencies.