The Bombay High Court has rejected Naresh Goyal's habeas corpus petition, in which he challenged his arrest in a money laundering case. Nonetheless, the court has stated that Goyal is permitted to explore alternative legal avenues for recourse.

On September 20, Goyal filed a petition with the high court to challenge his arrest, with the aim of overturning the special court's decisions that had placed him in judicial custody. He argued that his arrest not only infringed upon his personal freedom but also violated his constitutional rights as an accused individual, rendering it illegal.

Goyal was taken into custody by the Enforcement Directorate on September 1 in connection with a money laundering investigation related to a Rs 538 crore loan provided by Canara Bank to the airline. He is presently in judicial custody at Arthur Road Jail.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Jet Airways, Naresh Goyal, and his wife Anita in a fraud case based on a complaint filed by Canara Bank. This CBI FIR forms the basis for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) case related to money laundering.

According to the complaint, Naresh Goyal allegedly utilized a significant portion of the loan provided to Jet Airways, specifically Rs 538 crore out of a total of Rs 849 crore, for his personal expenses. Subsequently, the loan was declared as non-performing in 2019. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) recently submitted its chargesheet against Goyal and other individuals involved in the case before a special court in Mumbai.

In its presentation to the high court, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) defended the legality of the arrest, contending that the habeas corpus petition was not appropriate because it concerned a judicial remand. They stated that such a petition cannot be filed against an order for judicial custody. The agency emphasized that they adhered to the legal requirements for proper arrest procedures and safety measures.

Generally, a habeas corpus petition is not entertained when the accused is placed in judicial custody. However, it may be considered if the remand is deemed completely unlawful, lacks jurisdiction, or if it was issued in a purely mechanical manner.

Naresh Goyal's counsel, Amit Desai, argued that his arrest fell under an exception provided by the Supreme Court. According to Desai, the arrest was blatantly illegal because it occurred in direct violation of a high court order that had stayed further proceedings in the underlying CBI case. He further contended that Goyal was held in police custody for over 24 hours before being brought before a magistrate, which he claimed was a violation of the accused's constitutional rights.