We’ve rights too, says ED; Be sensitive to others’ rights: SC | India News

NEW DELHI: Courts are deluged with writs seeking protection of rights. But the one which turned up before Supreme Court bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan a few days ago grabbed attention because it fell in the ‘rarest of rare’ category. It was filed by Enforcement Directorate which has been at the receiving end of rights-enforcement petitions.
Though the anti-money laundering agency, through additional solicitor general S V Raju, withdrew the plea Tuesday, it will go down in court records for its extraordinariness. Appearing before the bench, Raju argued that ED also had rights. “We expect you to be sensitive also to the rights of others,” the bench reparteed on a lighter note.
ED had filed the petition against alleged non-cooperation of Chhattisgarh police with its probe into the Rs 2,100 crore liquor ‘scam’ that unfolded under the then Bhupesh Baghel-led Congress govt in state. The plea was withdrawn, sources said, because Chhattisgarh police’s approach changed after Congress’s defeat in assembly polls. In fact, a subsequent affidavit filed by Chhattisgarh govt in Aug 2024, (after formation of a BJP govt in state), supported ED’s allegation of nexus between Economic Offences Wing of Chhattisgarh police and one of the principal accused in the liquor ‘scam’, IAS officer Anil Tuteja.
In its now-withdrawn petition, ED had cited “evidence” to claim that Chhattisgarh police had not just shared drafts of reports on the status of its investigation with Tuteja but had also agreed to carry out changes suggested by him. ED went on to say that Chhattisgarh police influenced a witness to retract his statement under PMLA. “The purpose of sharing the draft (SIT report) was to seek approval from the accused persons before the same could be filed before (Chhattisgarh) HC,” the fresh affidavit said.
ED arrested Tuteja on April 21, 2024, after the agency claimed (in its remand note) that it had recovered digital evidence of the IAS officer allegedly receiving over Rs 14 crore from proceeds of crime. The agency subsequently seized Rs 16 crore of assets allegedly linked to Tuteja and his associates out of about Rs 200 crore of total attachments in the case. ED had submitted “evidence” of regular contact between Chhattisgarh police and Tuteja, including a WhatsApp chat purportedly between the IAS officer’s son and and one of the members of the SIT, with the former sharing the advice of his father’s counsel on how to draft the report on the status of investigation.
In another purported exchange with Tuteja Jr, the then head of EOW and Anti-Corruption Bureau discussed “efforts” to influence witnesses to get them to depose in favour of the IAS officer.
“The chats reveal role of successive chiefs of EOW/ACB in diluting the case against prime accused of predicate offence, Anil Tuteja and Alok Shukla,” the affidavit said, adding “the draft report of SIT was vetted by the prime accused, Anil Tuteja, with the help of his advocate Peeyush Bhatia”.
The affidavit also mentioned role of advocate general under Congress govt.