Madras HC stays ED’s attachment of director Shankar’s properties in Enthiran copyright case

“When this court had taken cognisance of the fact that the civil suit was dismissed and entertained the petition to quash the proceedings relating to the scheduled offence, the respondents ought not to have provisionally attached the properties under the order dated 17 February 2025, more particularly when a stay was in operation for the past three years,” the bench stated in its interim order.

Noting that the question of whether the impugned attachment order could be quashed would be adjudicated later, the bench ruled, “In view of a prima facie case having been made out, there shall be an order of interim stay.”

The court directed the ED to file a counter-affidavit and adjourned the case to 21 April for further hearing.

Senior counsel P.S. Raman, assisted by D. Saikumaran, appeared for Shankar and questioned the rationale behind the ED’s decision to attach the director’s property based on a private complaint by Arur Tamilnadan.

“Even though a single judge had passed orders in favour of Shankar, the ED proceeded to act on the private complaint,” he told the court.

However, the ED’s counsel, N. Cibi Vishnu, argued that the agency was legally permitted to act on complaints from private individuals. “No prejudice has been caused to Shankar through the provisional attachment of the property, and he can explore available legal remedies,” he submitted.