Enforcement Directorate Summons Amarinder Singh and Son in FEMA Case
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has officially summoned former Punjab chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh and his son Raninder Singh for questioning in connection with a Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) violation case. This development follows allegations that the father-son duo are beneficiaries of undisclosed foreign assets, including a Swiss bank account, as per findings by the Income Tax department dating back to 2016.
Details of the Summons and Current Status
Officials confirmed that Amarinder Singh has been directed to appear before the ED at its Jalandhar office on Thursday, while Raninder Singh is scheduled to depose the following day. However, Amarinder Singh is unlikely to comply with the summons immediately, as he is currently admitted to a private hospital in Mohali. The 83-year-old former chief minister underwent a knee replacement surgery on Tuesday and has been shifted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for post-operative monitoring. The ED is expected to grant him a fresh date to record his statement under FEMA provisions.
In response to the summons, Raninder Singh took to social media platform X to state, "As law-abiding citizens, we will cooperate fully with every investigation agency. We have absolute faith in the rule of law and are confident that truth and justice will prevail."
Background of the Case and Allegations
The case traces its origins to 2016, when Amarinder Singh was a member of the Congress party. The Income Tax department had received credible information from foreign authorities through official channels, indicating that the accused were beneficiaries of foreign assets controlled via various business entities. These assets reportedly included bank accounts with HSBC Private Bank in Geneva, Switzerland.
A complaint filed on November 18, 2016, in a Ludhiana court detailed data received by the Foreign Tax and Tax Research (FT&TR) division from 2011 onwards. This information originated from multiple jurisdictions, including France, Dubai, Switzerland, and the British Virgin Islands.
Investigation Findings and Legal Proceedings
The tax investigation revealed that the HSBC account was linked to entities incorporated by Raninder Singh, specifically the Jacaranda Trust and Mulwala Holding Limited, with Amarinder Singh identified as a beneficiary holder. Additionally, Amarinder was found to be an alleged beneficiary of foreign bank accounts maintained by HSBC Private Bank (Suisse) SA in Geneva and HSBC Financial Services (Middle East) Limited in Dubai.
In 2016, the Income Tax department filed a prosecution complaint (chargesheet) against the Singhs before the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Ludhiana. The charges included violations under section 277 of the Income Tax Act for making false statements, along with relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. The department accused them of tax evasion, concealment of foreign assets, and filing false statements on oath.
The allegations further stated that Jacaranda Trust was the beneficial owner of several British Virgin Islands offshore entities, such as Chillingham Holdings Limited, Allworth Venture Holdings, Limerlock International Limited, and Mulwala Holdings Limited.
Legal Challenges and Court Rulings
At the time, Amarinder Singh dismissed the complaint as "malafide and politically motivated," claiming the Income Tax department had failed to provide any proof of his alleged foreign assets. Subsequently, the ED filed an application before the magistrate court seeking inspection of documents from the tax department to aid its FEMA probe.
The magistrate court granted the ED's plea, but the Singhs challenged this order in the additional district court of Ludhiana. The additional district court upheld the magistrate's decision, prompting the Singhs to appeal to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. They argued that the Income Tax records contained "secret" information shared by France under the Indo-French Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), which barred disclosure to third parties.
In September 2025, the High Court dismissed the petitions, affirming the additional district judge's order as "well-reasoned" and free from legal errors. The court ruled that there was no legal impediment to allowing the ED access to the records for investigation, emphasizing that such inspection does not violate the DTAA. It clarified that the ED, as a statutory authority, is entitled to examine judicial records when investigating offences under law. However, the court stipulated that the information cannot be made public without proper legal authorization.
This case highlights ongoing scrutiny into alleged financial irregularities involving high-profile political figures, with the ED's summons marking a significant step in the legal process.
