High Court Denies Relief to Minister Sanjeev Arora, Questions Raised Over Arrest Procedure

May 15, 2026

The High Court today heard for about three-quarters of an hour the petition filed by Punjab Minister Sanjeev Arora, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Arora has not received any relief as of now. Arora’s lawyer argued that in his case, the complainant officer and the arresting officer are the same person, which is against the law under Section 19 of the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act).

The officer who registers the complaint and the officer who makes the arrest cannot be the same person. The ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report) was filed on May 5 and a raid was conducted on May 9. No material was made available to him under Section 50.

He requested the court to have the records brought in a sealed envelope to check whether any investigation was actually conducted in the FIR or not. The court has scheduled the next hearing of this case on Monday.

During the hearing, the court said, ‘You take us to the disputed order, what are you referring to?’ In response, Arora’s lawyer said that the arrest memo was fabricated. He was arrested at 7 in the morning and produced in court at 11:20 at night. If the arrest had taken place at 4 in the evening, he could have been produced during working hours.

‘What was the need to wake the judge at 11:20 at night?’ The grounds of arrest should have been given at the time of arrest. The grounds of arrest were pre-typed and pre-planned.

The ED gave factually incorrect information.

The court said that ‘nowhere in the entire case record is there any mention of income earned from the crime, whereas this is necessary for the ECIR.’ So far, no proceeds of crime have come to light. Section 19 has been violated. My main issue is that at the time of arrest, I was not given the grounds for the arrest. The remand judge also did not consider these facts. The ED’s lawyer said this is factually incorrect.

Arora’s lawyer presented 4 arguments

Arora concluded his arguments with Bali presenting 4 main points. He said that there is no concrete material in the case, the payments were made through checks, and also questioned whether the officer who filed the complaint can himself make the arrest. He said, “I have presented the sequence of events before the court.

In Punjab, political parties change, MPs leave. A raid under FEMA occurs on an MP, but no ECIR is filed. I maintained my stance and was arrested.

ED’s arguments also need to be heard

The court said, “Today is the third day and you have not completed your argument so far. You could have finished it in 30-35 minutes. I also need to hear the ED’s arguments.” The next hearing of the case has been adjourned to Monday.