The Court issued notice to ED and asked them to clarify whether the two petitioners were being summoned as witnesses or as accused. The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a plea filed by TMC leader and nephew of West Bengal Chief Minister Abhishek Banerjee and his wife Rujira Banerjee seeking quashing of summons issued issued by the ED in relation to the West Bengal coal smuggling scam (Abhishek Banerjee and Anr. v. Directorate of Enforcement). The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a plea filed by TMC leader and nephew of West Bengal Chief Minister Abhishek Banerjee and his wife Rujira Banerjee seeking quashing of summons issued issued by the ED in relation to the West Bengal coal smuggling scam (Abhishek Banerjee and Anr. v. Directorate of Enforcement). Justice Yogesh Khanna, however, declined to grant any interim relief in the matter. He, however asked ED to clarify whether the petitioners are being summoned as witnesses or as accused persons so that the Court can take a decision in the matter. The matter will be heard again on September 27. The petitioners submitted that Section 65 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) makes Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) applicable to investigation in PMLA cases, for as long as it is not inconsistent with its provisions. Therefore, summons issued to a person not accused under section 50 of PMLA must be treated as summons under section 160 CrPC. The same provision should be applicable to jurisdiction of officers when summoning a person beyond their jurisdiction. In this case, the jurisdiction is beyond the territorial limits of New Delhi since the cause of action and all aspects of the illegal mining and theft of coal have arisen in Kolkata and the petitioners should, therefore, be examined in Kolkata, it was contended. Appearing on behalf of Banerjee and his wife, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal submitted that the petitioners are not opposing to co-operate with the investigation, rather they are concerned with the manner in which the investigation was being conducted. He also argued that the offense for which the couple is being investigated occurred in 2017, but they are being asked to submit documents from 10 years ago. "ITR's of family members, citizenship documents, contracts, agreements, overseas trips etc. This is a completely fraudulent inquiry. Ask for all documents, find something and arrest them," Sibal contended He further claimed that there is evidence that details of the interrogation are being leaked to a reporter at Times Now channel. "The system is being used to denigrate our image," Sibal said. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing on behalf of ED, submitted that the scheme of CrPC is such that each police station has territorial jurisdiction. However, PMLA doesn't have any such jurisdictional limits and PMLA officers exercise jurisdiction all over India. It was also pointed out that Banerjee has a Delhi residence and his Wife Rujira will be deemed to be residing with him in Delhi. Hence, they can be summoned in Delhi. Sibal countered by arguing that the petitioner is a Member of Parliament and he visits Delhi for the said reasons. "I have a son who goes to school in 8th standard in Kolkata, I think this is sufficient proof that I reside in Kolkata," he said. Apart from that, he argued that place of residence has nothing to do with the summons.