Raninder Singh Skips ED Summons in FEMA Probe; Amarinder Singh Also Summoned
In a significant development in Jalandhar, Raninder Singh, the son of former Punjab chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh, failed to appear before the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday. This was in connection with an ongoing investigation under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) into alleged undisclosed foreign assets held by the father-son duo.
ED Summons and Health Concerns
The ED had issued separate summons to both Amarinder Singh and his son, Raninder Singh, requiring them to appear at the agency's Jalandhar office on Thursday and Friday, respectively. However, Raninder did not attend as scheduled. Sources indicate that Amarinder Singh is also unlikely to comply with the summons due to a recent knee replacement surgery he underwent on Tuesday at a hospital in Mohali.
This marks the first time that Amarinder Singh has been summoned by the ED in this case, whereas Raninder Singh had previously appeared before the agency in 2016 and 2020. The summons were reportedly sent "some days ago" to provide a reasonable opportunity for their appearance, as per standard procedural norms.
Background of the Probe
The investigation traces back to 2016 when the Income-Tax (I-T) department initiated proceedings based on documents received from French authorities under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. These documents allegedly revealed foreign bank accounts and assets linked to the Jacaranda Trust, with Amarinder Singh identified as a beneficiary. Similar allegations were made against Raninder Singh.
In a key legal development last September, the Punjab and Haryana High Court cleared the way for the ED to inspect the documents held by the I-T department, facilitating a deeper probe into the alleged foreign assets of the duo.
Political Reactions and Allegations
The ED summons have sparked strong political reactions, particularly from Congress MLA Pargat Singh. He condemned the summons to Amarinder Singh, alleging that central agencies are being used to muzzle dissent. Pargat Singh claimed that the moment Amarinder raised pointed questions about the BJP's disregard for Punjab's interests, agencies swiftly moved against him.
He further accused the AAP government in Punjab of following an authoritarian path by stifling dissenters through coercion or marginalization. Recalling past events, Pargat Singh noted how agencies were deployed to undermine Amarinder when he defended Punjab and its farmers as chief minister, only to later pressure him into joining the BJP.
"The shabby treatment meted out to Captain now serves as a stark warning to any Punjabi leader eyeing a switch to BJP or AAP. They must think twice before taking that fateful step," Pargat Singh asserted, highlighting the political tensions surrounding the case.
As the probe continues, the absence of Raninder Singh and the likely non-appearance of Amarinder Singh add layers of complexity to this high-profile investigation, with implications for both legal and political spheres in Punjab.
