Chattisgarh Liquor Scam : Supreme Court Asks UP Police To Not Take Coercive Steps On FIR Against Officials

According to the ED, IAS officer Anil Tuteja is the "kingpin" of the syndicate for illegal supply of liquor in Chhattisgarh. The UP Police FIR names Tuteja and certain other officers.

In its last hearing, the Bench had observed that the ED complaint pertains to the offence under the Income Tax Act. Further, the Court also opined that the competent Court had not taken cognizance with respect to predicate offense.  After considering the above circumstances, the Court ordered on July 18: “the concerned respondent authorities must stay their hands in all manner”

Courtroom Exchange and Court’s Observations

At the outset, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, while referring to the above order, submitted, "If there is no predicate offence, there is no PMLA". Moving forward, he argued that, in order to circumvent the aforementioned order of the Court, the Investigating Officer of the same investigation wrote a letter to UP Police for registering a case against petitioners. He elucidated: “They become informants in UP Police FIR”. 

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the ED, submitted that since offence unconnected from income tax was discovered, FIR was filed. Raju went on to submit that ED is duty-bound to do the same under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Essentially, according to ED, a certain duplication of holograms has taken place, and the same was being manufactured in Noida.

At this, Justice Kaul opined:

“It is not a violation of our order or direction."

Rohatgi replied:

“My lords, the days will give the case away.” He contended that on July 18^th, 2023, the Court directed ED to stay their hands in all manner with respect to the ECIR, which ED investigated. "If you are to stay hands in an investigation, what you are doing under Section 66(2) (PMLA) is also stayed.” However, when Justice Kaul clarified that it was not the order's intent, Rohatgi asserted that the intent was also not that another case would arise after one week of the order.

The Bench observed that the observation “any manner” in the previous order did not mean that if any other offence is detected, the same cannot be proceeded against.

After being asked by the Bench whether the said manufacturing is taking place in Noida. Rohatgi replied:

“I am a government servant; I am being targeted. I don’t manufacture anything”

Justice Kaul, taking note of the same, observed that if petitioners are bureaucrats, how can they manufacture something in Noida? Further, the Apex Court inquired ED "when these aspects came into notice.” However, ASG sought for some time, and accordingly, the Court adjourned the matter to August 21^st, 2023, while directing UP police not to take any coercive action.

After the Court pronounced the order, ASG remarked, "Bureaucrats are involved in rampant corruption and they are minting money out of liquor scam.”

To this, Justice Kaul remarked, "In some way you should have begun it differently or followed it differently, you are supposed to be an expert body in this, you must know how to proceed with your cases.”

“If this is something that is in your notice, for a year then you should have started all this then”

“Timing becomes important, if you start the timing now and even if you have a good case, let’s say I presume that you have a good case, then timing becomes a problem… Supposed all this come to your notice, six months ago and you start now, there is a problem.”

[Case Title: Yash Tuteja And Anr. v. Union of India And Ors. W.P.(Crl.) No. 153/2023]

Click here to read the order