<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea by former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, and his son, challenging the powers of the CBI and the ED to arrest and investigate accused individuals and their jurisdictions.</p><p>The court asked Bhupesh Baghel and his son Chaitanya to move the State HC for interim relief.</p><p>Congress leader Bhupesh Baghel accused Centre, Chhattisgarh government, CBI and ED of malafidely and illegally filing chargesheets and prosecution complaints in piece-meal and taking coercive actions including arrest against many individuals even after filing of chargesheets and prosecution complaints. </p> .Chhattisgarh liquor 'scam': ED arrests Bhupesh Baghel's son Chaitanya .<p>Bhupesh has been made accused in cases related to liquor scam and coal scam, Mahadev betting app, Rice milling and DMF 'scam' in Chhattisgarh, while his son is an accused in the liquor scam.</p><p>He sought protection from coercive actions in five cases. One of his petitions sought relief in cases lodged by the ED as it challenged Sections 44, 50 and 63 of PMLA, the other petition sought reliefs in cases lodged by the CBI and State Police.</p> .<p>Upon hearing the counsel, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi disposed of two petitions as withdrawn.</p><p>"We are not entertaining the pleas. Please approach the High Court for individual reliefs and requested the High Court to provide an expeditious hearing into their plea," the bench said.</p><p>During the hearing on Monday, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Chaitanya, contended that he was not named as an accused, nor issued summons, before he came to be arrested.</p> .<p>The court granted liberty to Chaitanya to file a separate writ petition before it challenging Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA.</p><p>Senior lawyers, Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Bhupesh sought explanation the way the ED committed "mischief" by endlessly continuing investigation against his client in the five cases. </p><p>"There is no material against him," Sibal pointed out.</p><p>The third petition, filed by Bhupesh Baghel, was adjourned to August 6, when the court is slated to consider the batch of petitions challenging Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgment (which upheld various PMLA provisions). This petition, which raised challenge to Sections 44 (dealing with further investigation), 50 and 63 of PMLA, was re-listed to see if it should be tagged with the pending batch of pleas.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea by former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, and his son, challenging the powers of the CBI and the ED to arrest and investigate accused individuals and their jurisdictions.</p><p>The court asked Bhupesh Baghel and his son Chaitanya to move the State HC for interim relief.</p><p>Congress leader Bhupesh Baghel accused Centre, Chhattisgarh government, CBI and ED of malafidely and illegally filing chargesheets and prosecution complaints in piece-meal and taking coercive actions including arrest against many individuals even after filing of chargesheets and prosecution complaints. </p> .Chhattisgarh liquor 'scam': ED arrests Bhupesh Baghel's son Chaitanya .<p>Bhupesh has been made accused in cases related to liquor scam and coal scam, Mahadev betting app, Rice milling and DMF 'scam' in Chhattisgarh, while his son is an accused in the liquor scam.</p><p>He sought protection from coercive actions in five cases. One of his petitions sought relief in cases lodged by the ED as it challenged Sections 44, 50 and 63 of PMLA, the other petition sought reliefs in cases lodged by the CBI and State Police.</p> .<p>Upon hearing the counsel, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi disposed of two petitions as withdrawn.</p><p>"We are not entertaining the pleas. Please approach the High Court for individual reliefs and requested the High Court to provide an expeditious hearing into their plea," the bench said.</p><p>During the hearing on Monday, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Chaitanya, contended that he was not named as an accused, nor issued summons, before he came to be arrested.</p> .<p>The court granted liberty to Chaitanya to file a separate writ petition before it challenging Sections 50 and 63 of PMLA.</p><p>Senior lawyers, Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Bhupesh sought explanation the way the ED committed "mischief" by endlessly continuing investigation against his client in the five cases. </p><p>"There is no material against him," Sibal pointed out.</p><p>The third petition, filed by Bhupesh Baghel, was adjourned to August 6, when the court is slated to consider the batch of petitions challenging Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgment (which upheld various PMLA provisions). This petition, which raised challenge to Sections 44 (dealing with further investigation), 50 and 63 of PMLA, was re-listed to see if it should be tagged with the pending batch of pleas.</p>
