The Jharkhand High Court on Thursday stepped in to protect two senior Enforcement Directorate (ED) officers from arrest and police action, staying all proceedings in an FIR lodged against them. The court also ordered immediate paramilitary security at the ED’s Ranchi zonal office, citing the sensitive nature of ongoing investigations and the risk of disruption to a central agency’s functioning.
The interim relief was granted by Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi while hearing a criminal writ petition filed by the officers, who alleged that the FIR was a retaliatory move to derail a high-profile money laundering probe.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Pratik, an Assistant Director, and Shubham Bharti, an Assistant Enforcement Officer with the ED’s Ranchi zonal office. They challenged Airport Police Station Case No. 05 of 2026, registered on January 13, under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Read also:- Rajasthan HC Rules RTE Quota Applies at Pre-School Level, Strikes Down State’s Restricted Entry Policy
According to the petitioners, the informant Santosh Kumar is himself an accused in a large-scale scam involving the alleged misappropriation of around ₹23 crore from the Drinking Water and Sanitation Department of the Jharkhand government. An Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) has already been registered against him, and he is currently out on bail.
The officers told the court that Santosh Kumar appeared at the ED office on January 12 without being summoned. During questioning, they claimed, he became agitated and struck his own head with a glass water jug, causing a minor injury. He was immediately taken to Sadar Hospital for treatment and later sent home after medical advice.
A day later, Santosh Kumar lodged an FIR accusing the ED officers of serious offences. The situation escalated when police allegedly arrived at the ED office early the next morning and attempted to treat the premises as a crime scene, disrupting official work.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Bihar Rule Requiring Pharmacy Diploma for Govt Jobs, Rejects Degree-Only Claims
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Amit Kumar Das submitted that the Ranchi ED office is currently handling multiple “high-profile and sensitive” investigations involving influential political figures and senior bureaucrats. He argued that the FIR was a “pre-planned tactic” to intimidate officers and obstruct lawful investigations.
“The petitioners are discharging their statutory duties strictly in accordance with law,” counsel told the court, stressing that Section 67 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act provides protection to officers acting in good faith.
On behalf of the state, senior advocate Kapil Sibal appeared through video conferencing, while the Union of India was represented by Additional Solicitor General Prashant Pallav. Counsel for the informant sought time to file a counter-affidavit, maintaining that Santosh Kumar had visited the ED office on a phone call from one of the officers and was duly entered in the visitors’ register.
Court’s Observations
Justice Dwivedi noted that High Courts are generally cautious in granting interim relief at the stage of an FIR. However, he made it clear that the court could not “be a mute spectator” when allegations suggested an attempt to interfere with the functioning of a central investigative agency.
Referring to the statutory protection under the money laundering law, the bench observed that officers acting in good faith under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act deserve legal safeguards.
The court also expressed concern over the security of the ED office and the possibility of untoward incidents if the situation was allowed to escalate.
Read also:- Gadag Murder Case: Supreme Court Reverses High Court, Orders Release of Accused
Decision and Directions
In a significant interim order, the High Court stayed all further proceedings and police investigation in Airport P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 until the next hearing.
The court directed the Union Home Secretary to deploy CISF, BSF, or any other suitable paramilitary force at the ED’s Ranchi office. It further instructed the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, to personally ensure the security of the premises, warning that he would be held responsible for any untoward incident.
Additional directions included preserving all CCTV footage at the ED office and completing procedural steps such as impleading necessary parties and filing counter-affidavits.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on February 9, 2026.
Case Title:- Pratik & Anr. vs State of Jharkhand & Ors.
Case Number:- W.P. (Cr.) Filing No. 1059 of 2026
Date of Order:- 16 January 2026
