On Monday, August 21, the Supreme Court extended interim protection from coercive action to certain Chhattisgarh government officials in connection with the Chhattisgarh liquor scam case. The court, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, remarked that the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) cannot operate as an independent authority.

The officials had filed a plea against an FIR filed by the Uttar Pradesh Police on July 30, allegedly to bypass a July 18 Supreme Court order restraining the ED from proceeding with its investigation into the Chhattisgarh liquor scam. 

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the officials, argued that the UP Police FIR was a maneuver to circumvent the court's order. The court had issued the July 18 order based on the contention that the ED's case was rooted in alleged offenses under the Income Tax Act of 1961, which were not classified as scheduled offenses under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The petitioners, including IAS officer Atul Tuteja and his son Yash Tuteja, argued that the ED could not proceed without a competent court taking cognizance of the scheduled offense.

During the hearing on August 7, the officials claimed that the ED had filed the FIR with the UP Police to evade the Supreme Court's order. In response, the ED argued that it was obligated to inform the jurisdictional police of any offenses detected during its investigation. The court had asked the ED's counsel to clarify when the information about the UP Police FIR was obtained—before or after the July 18 order.

The matter was listed for the hearing on August 21. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi reiterated the sequence of events, stating that the impugned FIRs were filed after the stay order was obtained.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the ED, informed the court that the information had been acquired before the order was passed. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul retorted that the ED could not act as an entity above the law. The court recorded in the order that the ED had knowledge of the aspect prior to the passing of the interim order on August 7, thereby extending the order.

The case is scheduled to be heard again on September 26, 2023. The case title is "Yash Tuteja and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. W.P.(Crl.) No. 153/2023." The Supreme Court's oral observation emphasized that the ED cannot operate as an independent authority and must adhere to legal processes.

Click here to read/download order