The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a special leave petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) assailing the Bombay High Court’s decision declaring the arrest of suspended IAS officer and Vasai-Virar City Municipal Commissioner Anilkumar Pawar as illegal.

A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order after hearing Additional Solicitor General SV Raju for the ED. Responding to a court query, the ASG clarified that the photographs of ornaments allegedly recovered during raids were taken prior to Pawar’s arrest, adding, “My lords will be shocked if you look at the WhatsApp chats.”

Senior Advocate Rajiv Shakdher, appearing for Pawar, opposed the plea, arguing that Pawar was not named in any of the five FIRs related to the case and that out of over 40 builders implicated, only a few found mention in the prosecution complaint.

“You are alleged to be hands-in-glove with Y.S. [Reddy]…” Justice Mehta remarked. The bench then issued notice and directed the respondents to file their counter-affidavits.

The controversy stems from alleged illegal constructions in Vasai-Virar between 2008 and 2010. The first FIR was filed in 2019 by a VVCMC Assistant Commissioner, and the ED later registered an ECIR in 2025. During investigation, ED reportedly recovered cash and ornaments from the premises of former Deputy Director of Urban Planning Y.S. Reddy. Pawar and others were arrested on August 13, with the agency alleging proceeds of crime worth ₹300.92 crore, of which ₹169 crore were attributed to Pawar.

The ED accused Pawar of permitting rampant unauthorized construction of 41 buildings in return for kickbacks, supported by builders’ statements, WhatsApp chats, and cash transactions. Pawar, however, contended before the High Court that he joined VVCMC only in January 2022 and had actively acted against illegal constructions, having no link to events from 2008–2010. He further argued that his arrest under PMLA lacked the requisite “reason to believe” backed by tangible material.

The ED defended its action, citing evidence of money transfers from Reddy, his predicate offence of corruption, and corroborating statements from architects and developers.

After hearing both sides, the High Court held Pawar’s arrest illegal, observing that at the time of arrest, the agency did not possess “tangible material.” Noting that no recovery was made from Pawar or his family, the Court said the ED’s case, based largely on Reddy’s statement about a “codeword system” for bribe collection, lacked specificity and proof.

The Court remarked:

“The ED’s allegations that the petitioner received ₹17.75 crore from Reddy are unsupported by any description of the project or recovery of incriminating material such as chats, diaries, or messages.”

It also pointed out that Pawar was not named in the 2019 FIR, and that the agency’s claims were based on speculation and hazy facts. The High Court clarified that materials collected post-arrest (after August 12, 2025) could not justify the arrest itself but might aid the ED’s future prosecution.

ED’s request to stay the order was refused, prompting the agency to move the Supreme Court.

Appearances: ASG S.V. Raju for ED; Sr Adv Rajiv Shakdher, AoR Niteen Kumar Sinha for Pawar

Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement v. Anilkumar Khanderao Pawar & Anr., SLP (Crl) No. 16841/2025