<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted bail to former IAS officer Anil Tuteja in the alleged Rs 2,000 crore liquor scam in Chhattisgarh.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan observed there were 20 accused and over 30 witnesses left to be examined in the matter.</p>.<p>Tuteja was arrested on April 21, 2024, on a complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.</p>.<p>The bench was informed about an order passed by Chhattisgarh High Court in which the order of cognisance passed by a special court was set aside on the ground that sanction under section 197 of CrPC was not granted before order taking cognisance.</p>.Chhattisgarh liquor 'scam': ED raids Bhupesh Baghel's son, others .<p>Section 197 provides a shield for public servants and judges against prosecution for alleged offences committed while acting in their official capacity and mandates prior sanction from the appropriate government before a court can take cognisance of such offences.</p>.<p>"The order dated April 2, 2025 has not been challenged. As of today, there is no order taking cognisance. The appellant has undergone incarceration of about a year. There are more than 20 accused and more than 30 prosecution witnesses have been cited," the top court said.</p>.<p>The bench went on, "The maximum sentence which can be imposed in this case is of imprisonment of seven years. Therefore the principle laid down by this court in Senthil Balaji judgment will apply. Moreover, in similar situation, this court by order dated February 12, 2025, has granted bail to a co-accused. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail." The apex court directed the ED to produce Tuteja before the relevant court for bail formalities, observing the court of the special judge was vacant.</p>.<p>Tuteja, the bench said, would be released on bail subject to strict terms and conditions, including surrender of passport and cooperating with the court for the hearings.</p>.<p>Additional solicitor general S V Raju, appearing for the ED, opposed the bail saying Tuteja was a senior bureaucrat indulged in rampant corruption and running a "well-oiled machinery" of parallel sales of liquor.</p>.<p>Raju accused Tuteja of also being involved in the Nagrik Apurti Nigam scam, alleging he was capable of influencing witnesses.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Tuteja, submitted the order of cognisance passed by the special court was set aside.</p>.<p>The ED has claimed the alleged scam was perpetrated by a syndicate of high-level state government officials, private persons and political executives that generated more than Rs 2,000 crore in tainted money in 2019-22.</p>.<p>The money laundering case stems from a 2022 income tax department charge sheet filed in a court in Delhi.</p>.<p>The federal agency alleged that bribes were collected from distillers in the state on a per liquor case basis procured from the CSMCL (state body for purchase and sale of liquor) and country liquor was being sold off-the-books.</p>.<p>According to the ED, bribes were taken from distillers to allow them to form a cartel and have a fixed market share. </p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted bail to former IAS officer Anil Tuteja in the alleged Rs 2,000 crore liquor scam in Chhattisgarh.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan observed there were 20 accused and over 30 witnesses left to be examined in the matter.</p>.<p>Tuteja was arrested on April 21, 2024, on a complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.</p>.<p>The bench was informed about an order passed by Chhattisgarh High Court in which the order of cognisance passed by a special court was set aside on the ground that sanction under section 197 of CrPC was not granted before order taking cognisance.</p>.Chhattisgarh liquor 'scam': ED raids Bhupesh Baghel's son, others .<p>Section 197 provides a shield for public servants and judges against prosecution for alleged offences committed while acting in their official capacity and mandates prior sanction from the appropriate government before a court can take cognisance of such offences.</p>.<p>"The order dated April 2, 2025 has not been challenged. As of today, there is no order taking cognisance. The appellant has undergone incarceration of about a year. There are more than 20 accused and more than 30 prosecution witnesses have been cited," the top court said.</p>.<p>The bench went on, "The maximum sentence which can be imposed in this case is of imprisonment of seven years. Therefore the principle laid down by this court in Senthil Balaji judgment will apply. Moreover, in similar situation, this court by order dated February 12, 2025, has granted bail to a co-accused. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail." The apex court directed the ED to produce Tuteja before the relevant court for bail formalities, observing the court of the special judge was vacant.</p>.<p>Tuteja, the bench said, would be released on bail subject to strict terms and conditions, including surrender of passport and cooperating with the court for the hearings.</p>.<p>Additional solicitor general S V Raju, appearing for the ED, opposed the bail saying Tuteja was a senior bureaucrat indulged in rampant corruption and running a "well-oiled machinery" of parallel sales of liquor.</p>.<p>Raju accused Tuteja of also being involved in the Nagrik Apurti Nigam scam, alleging he was capable of influencing witnesses.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Tuteja, submitted the order of cognisance passed by the special court was set aside.</p>.<p>The ED has claimed the alleged scam was perpetrated by a syndicate of high-level state government officials, private persons and political executives that generated more than Rs 2,000 crore in tainted money in 2019-22.</p>.<p>The money laundering case stems from a 2022 income tax department charge sheet filed in a court in Delhi.</p>.<p>The federal agency alleged that bribes were collected from distillers in the state on a per liquor case basis procured from the CSMCL (state body for purchase and sale of liquor) and country liquor was being sold off-the-books.</p>.<p>According to the ED, bribes were taken from distillers to allow them to form a cartel and have a fixed market share. </p>