The Chhattisgarh government earlier assured the Supreme Court that it would not take any coercive steps against Verma in relation to the NAN scam case.
NEW DELHI: Today, 28th Feb, The Supreme Court of India granted pre-arrest bail to Satish Chandra Verma, former Advocate General of Chhattisgarh, in connection with the Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) scam case.
The decision was made on Friday by a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, who also directed Verma to fully cooperate in the investigation.
During the hearing, Verma’s legal team, led by senior advocate Vivek Tankha and advocate Sumeer Sodhi, argued that the Chhattisgarh High Court had wrongly determined that custodial interrogation was necessary.
They emphasized that “no offence whatsoever was made out on the basis of allegations.”
On the other hand, senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, appearing for the Chhattisgarh state government, strongly opposed the anticipatory bail plea.
He stated that “there was enough material against the law officer.”
Background
The Chhattisgarh government earlier assured the Supreme Court that it would not take any coercive steps against Verma in relation to the NAN scam case. The court issued a notice to the state government regarding the matter.
As per the allegations in the FIR, Verma is accused of helping two key accused in the NAN scam, Anil Tuteja and Alok Shukla, secure bail. The NAN scam revolves around corruption in the distribution of essential food items such as rice, grams, and salt. Several high-ranking bureaucrats were arrested in the case, which exposed large-scale irregularities in public food supply.
Verma had earlier approached the Chhattisgarh High Court after his anticipatory bail plea was rejected by the Sessions Court in November last year. However, on February 13, the High Court also denied him relief.
Following this, Verma moved the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s decision.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Verma, argued that he was being unfairly targeted due to a change in government in the state.
He submitted that “he was being ‘hounded’ only because of change in government last year.”
Rohatgi also pointed out that the prime accused in the case had already been granted bail in 2019, and the state government had not challenged these bail orders. However, he noted that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had contested the granting of bail.
On February 21, the Supreme Court issued a notice on Verma’s petition and recorded the Chhattisgarh government’s statement that “no coercive steps will be taken against Verma till the next date.”
CASE TITLE:
Satish Chandra Verma v. State of Chattisgarh| SLP(Crl) No. 2600/2025
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
