The Jharkhand High Court on Wednesday refused to stay the proceedings for framing charges against Chief Minister Hemant Soren in a money laundering case linked to an 8.86-acre land parcel in the Bargai area of Ranchi. Soren had approached the High Court challenging the maintainability of the proceedings before the special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in Ranchi. The High Court’s decision allows the special court to continue with the charge-framing process while Soren’s petition remains pending. The case concerns allegations related to the 8.86-acre parcel and an ongoing investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

The matter was heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice MS Sonak and Justice Manoj Prasad. A partial hearing took place on September 29, following which the court listed the matter for detailed hearing on September 30 at 2:15 pm. Soren’s petition sought intervention by the High Court against the continuation of charge-framing proceedings before the special PMLA court. The plea also challenges the legal basis for proceeding with the case before the investigation has been completed. The court, however, did not grant the interim relief sought by the Chief Minister.

During Wednesday’s hearing, the High Court sought a response from the Enforcement Directorate and directed the Central Government to file its reply. The next hearing in the matter has been fixed for October 28. The court made clear that merely filing the High Court petition would not be sufficient to halt the proceedings before the special PMLA court. As a result, the special court can proceed with the process of framing charges against Soren while the High Court examines the legal issues raised in his petition.

Also Read: Delhi Court Denies Bail to Ex-Reliance Capital Executive Jhunjhunwala in ₹11,000 Crore Case

The dispute before the High Court is also connected to Soren’s challenge under Section 44(1)(d) of the PMLA. His legal team has argued that the charge-framing process should not proceed while further investigation by the ED is pending. The issue had also come up before the special PMLA court, where Soren’s side sought additional time and argued that the ongoing investigation and documents held by the agency needed to be examined before the proceedings could move forward. The ED, however, has maintained that further investigation and a supplementary complaint do not prevent proceedings based on the original complaint from continuing.

Earlier in September, Soren had sought relief from the Jharkhand High Court against the continuation of the proceedings in the money laundering case. On September 18, the High Court dismissed an intervention petition seeking to halt the proceedings before the special PMLA court. The special court subsequently continued dealing with the matter. Soren had also sought exemption from personal appearance before the special court, but that request was rejected by the High Court. He was later required to appear before the PMLA court as proceedings concerning the framing of charges moved forward.

The special PMLA court had earlier deferred the charge-framing proceedings after Soren’s counsel sought time to examine documents held by the ED that had not been relied upon in the prosecution case. The court later fixed September 30 for further proceedings. In a related order, the special court rejected Soren’s request to defer the trial, noting that the continuation of further investigation did not by itself require the original proceedings to be stopped. The ED has argued that supplementary investigation is legally permissible under the PMLA and does not prevent the trial from proceeding on the basis of the original complaint.

With Wednesday’s refusal to grant a stay, the special PMLA court is free to proceed with the framing of charges against Soren. The High Court will next consider the matter on October 28 after receiving responses from the ED and the Central Government. The proceedings at this stage concern whether charges can be framed and whether the special court can continue while further investigation remains pending. The allegations against Soren remain subject to judicial proceedings, and the High Court has not made a final determination on the merits of the underlying money laundering case.

Also Read: ED Raids 14 Premises Across Multiple States in NHAI Toll Plaza Fraud Case