The Allahabad High Court denied relief to former IAS officer Anil Tuteja in connection with the Chhattisgarh liquor scam. The court ruled that despite the Supreme Court recently quashing a money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate in July 2023, the FIR registered by the UP police remains valid.
The Allahabad High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated in Uttar Pradesh against former Chhattisgarh bureaucrat Anil Tuteja, Anwar Dhebar (brother of Raipur’s mayor), and two others in connection with the Chhattisgarh liquor scam.
Justices Siddhartha Verma and Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra ruled that even though the Supreme Court quashed a related money laundering case, it did not preclude the continuation of criminal proceedings in Uttar Pradesh against Tuteja and the others.
Read Also: Supreme Court Halts NBW Warrant in Chhattisgarh Liquor Scam
The Court emphasized that witness statements gathered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and shared with Uttar Pradesh police could still be used to support the ongoing criminal proceedings in UP.
The Court stated in its October 4 ruling,
“It will be very unsafe to accept the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners (accused) that for all initiation of criminal cases, statements made before the authorities under Section 50 of the PML Act, 2002 could never be used. Such statements which are in the knowledge of an investigating agency can always be used for initiating or for furthering of any pending investigation. It of course need not be used for the purposes of a trial and definitely they could not be categorized as confessions or admissions.”
The case against Anil Tuteja and others revolves around accusations of a Rs. 2,000 crore liquor syndicate allegedly operating in Chhattisgarh during the tenure of Congress leader Bhupesh Baghel as Chief Minister.
On July 4, 2023, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) registered a money laundering case related to the racket. During its investigation, the ED discovered a connection to Uttar Pradesh. Witness statements collected by the ED reportedly unveiled information about a company in Noida that was illicitly awarding tenders for supplying holograms (used on liquor bottles to confirm authenticity and excise duty payments) to Chhattisgarh’s Excise Department.
Following a communication from the ED dated July 28, 2023, the Uttar Pradesh police registered a First Information Report (FIR) on July 30, 2023, against Tuteja and others. However, on April 8, 2024, the Supreme Court quashed the ED’s money laundering case, ruling that there was no predicate offense since the ED’s complaint was based on provisions of the Income Tax Act, which are not part of the scheduled offenses listed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Subsequently, four of the accused, including Anil Tuteja, Anwar Dhebar, Arun Pati Tripathi, and Niranjan Das, petitioned the Allahabad High Court seeking the dismissal of the Uttar Pradesh FIR. The key issue before the High Court was whether the FIR in Uttar Pradesh could stand, given that it was based on witness statements recorded by the ED under Section 50 of the PMLA, despite the Supreme Court’s quashing of the ED’s complaint.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that the FIR filed by the Uttar Pradesh police would stand and refused to quash the case against Anil Tuteja and the other petitioners.
The Court stated,
“In the instant case, so far as the petitioners Anil Tuteja, Arun Pati Tripathi and Niranjan Das are concerned, we do find that against them a definite allegation is there in the FIR and they disclose cognizable offences under sections 420, 468, 471, 473, 484, and 120-B IPC.”
Regarding Anwar Dhebar, the Court noted that the evidence gathered after the FIR’s filing “definitely showed complicity of Dhebar in the alleged crime.”
In a related development, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) initiated fresh money laundering proceedings against Tuteja just days after the Supreme Court’s April 8 decision to quash its earlier complaint.
Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, assisted by advocates Saksham Srivastava and Vinayak Mithal, along with advocates Iman Ullah, Rajiv Lochan Shukla, and Shishir Prakash, represented Tuteja and the other petitioners.
Additional Advocate General PK Giri, supported by Additional Government Advocate Pankaj Kumar, represented the State of Uttar Pradesh, while Advocate Zoheb Hossain, assisted by Sikandar Bharat Kochar, appeared for the ED.