'ED Cannot Be A Law Unto Itself' : Supreme Court Extends Interim Relief In Chhattisgarh Liquor Scam Case
ED (Directorate of Enforcement) cannot be a law unto itself, orally observed the Supreme Court on Monday (August 21) while extending the interim protection from coercive action to certain Chattisgarh government officials in the UP Police FIR over alleged making of duplicate holograms in connection with the liquor scam case.A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia...
ED (Directorate of Enforcement) cannot be a law unto itself, orally observed the Supreme Court on Monday (August 21) while extending the interim protection from coercive action to certain Chattisgarh government officials in the UP Police FIR over alleged making of duplicate holograms in connection with the liquor scam case.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia was hearing the officials' plea against the liquor scam case. It is worth mentioning that in its last hearing, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for certain bureaucrats, had contended that the UP Police FIR was registered on July 30, in order to circumvent the Supreme Court’s July 18 order which restrained the ED from proceeding with investigation in relation to the Chhattisgarh liquor scam. The bench passed the July 18 order taking note of the petitioners' contention that the ED case is based on certain alleged offences under the Income Tax Act 1961, which is not a scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The petitioners, including IAS officer Atul Tuteja and his son Yash Tuteja, had contended that ED cannot proceed without a competent court taking cognizance of the scheduled offence.
On the last hearing date (August 7), the petitioners had argued that in order to bypass the Supreme Court's order, the ED had caused an FIR to be lodged with the UP Police over allegations of forgery. Countering this argument, the ED had contended that the agency was bound to inform the jurisdictional police about any offence which it detects during the course of its investigation. At this point, the Court had asked the ED's counsel to get instructions as to when the information relating to the UP Police FIR was obtained- whether before the July 18 order or after.
Thus, the Court had listed the matter to August 21 and ordered:
"On our query as to when these aspects came to the notice of the ED, learned ASG seeks a short accommodation to obtain instructions...The Uttar Pradesh Police may not take any coercive steps till the next date though we are not impeding the investigation"
Courtroom exchange yesterday
At the commencement of the hearing, Rohatgi reiterated the facts and stated that after the stay was obtained, the impugned FIR against petitioners were filed.
At this, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju submitted that “My lords, on last occasion wanted to know as to when we got hold of the information… It is correct that before the order was passed we got hold of the information”.
Justice Kaul retorted “ED (Directorate of Enforcement) cannot be a law unto itself.” and recorded the following in the order:
“Learned counsel for the petitioners very fairly states on our query that the aspect has come to the notice of the ED prior in time. Thus, interim order dated 07.08.2023 to continue.”
The case will be next heard on September 26, 2023.
Case Title: Yash Tuteja and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. W.P.(Crl.) No. 153/2023