Supreme Court Expresses Inclination to Transfer 2020 Gold Smuggling Case to Karnataka
Lexpedia · 23 March 2025 · 3 min read
On March 20, 2025, the Supreme Court orally indicated a prima facie inclination to transfer the trial of the 2020 gold smuggling case involving money laundering from Kerala to Karnataka. The case, related to the seizure of gold worth ₹14.82 crore at Trivandrum International Airport, has been under investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
ED’s Petition for Transfer
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) filed a petition in 2022 seeking to transfer the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case, currently being heard in the Special PMLA Court in Ernakulam, to a Special Court for PMLA cases in Karnataka. The ED's primary argument for the transfer was the influence of top Kerala Government officials on the case, which it claimed made a free and fair trial impossible in Kerala.
Oral Observations by the Bench
A bench consisting of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal heard the ED’s petition. During the proceedings, Justice Sundresh observed that the allegations in the case were serious, prompting the suggestion that the transfer request should not be opposed. He noted, “Why does the ED not go for transfer,” reflecting the court’s apparent support for the ED’s stance.
The court’s suggestion to transfer the case arose after Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the State of Kerala, requested a passover due to his involvement in another matter. Sibal opposed the transfer, questioning the timing of the ED’s request, particularly highlighting the change in the political landscape with the formation of a non-BJP government in Karnataka in 2023.
Allegations and Opposition
The ED claimed that the accused persons in the case, including M Sivasankar, an IAS officer, and other influential figures, had strong ties with top Kerala Government officials. The agency also alleged that the Kerala Police was pressuring the accused to retract their statements, thus potentially undermining the trial.
During the hearing, Sibal raised concerns about the ED’s shifting stance on the transfer. He questioned why the ED initially sought a transfer to Karnataka and now seemed to oppose it. He also highlighted that since the investigation was complete and charges had been framed, there was no need for the transfer.
Despite these objections, Justice Sundresh seemed inclined toward the transfer, stating that if the ED was committed to the original petition, there was no problem with transferring the case to Karnataka.
New Accused and Procedural Issues
Senior Advocate Jayant Muthuraj, representing some of the accused, pointed out that additional accused persons had been added through a supplementary complaint. The bench emphasized the need for proper notice to be issued to these newly added accused, to prevent future arguments of prejudice.
The court adjourned the matter for two weeks, giving the ED time to implead the newly added accused in the petition.
Background of the Case
The case revolves around the seizure of gold smuggled in diplomatic baggage at Trivandrum International Airport in July 2020. The Customs Commissionerate had seized the contraband, which was addressed to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Consulate in Thiruvananthapuram.
The ED alleges that the influential accused, including Swapna Suresh, Sandeep Nair, and PS Sarith, were involved in the smuggling operation, with some of them having close connections with high-ranking officials in the Kerala Government. The ED further claims that the Kerala Police had attempted to derail the investigation, even filing counter-allegations against ED officials.
