The Supreme Court has granted bail to former bureaucrat Arun Kumar Tripathi, arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a money laundering case linked to the Chhattisgarh liquor scam. The court expressed disapproval of the ED’s approach, likening it to the misuse of dowry harassment laws under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
A bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan questioned the ED’s insistence on keeping Tripathi in custody, especially after the Chhattisgarh High Court quashed the trial court’s cognisance of the offence due to the absence of the required sanction for prosecution. The bench remarked that the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act should not be used to detain individuals indefinitely.
Tripathi, an Indian Telecommunications Service officer, was arrested on 8 August 2024, in connection with the alleged ₹2,000 crore Chhattisgarh liquor scam. The ED had filed a supplementary complaint against him on 5 October 2024, which led to the trial court taking cognisance of the offence. However, on 7 February 2025, the High Court quashed this cognisance order, citing the lack of necessary sanction for prosecution.
Despite the High Court’s decision, the ED opposed Tripathi’s bail plea in the Supreme Court. Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, representing the ED, argued that individuals causing significant harm to the country should not be protected and that the law should not be interpreted in a manner that allows “crooks” to escape on technical grounds.
The Supreme Court, however, was not persuaded by this argument. Justice Oka questioned the ED’s stance, asking, “If cognisance has been quashed, why should the accused be in jail?” The bench emphasised that once the order taking cognisance has been quashed, the accused cannot continue to be detained.
The court also criticised the ED for not acting diligently and suppressing information about the quashing of the cognisance order. Justice Oka remarked, “What kind of signal are you sending? A person is in custody since August 8, 2024. As of today, there is no order of a court taking cognisance of the complaint against him, and still he is in custody?”
This case has brought to light concerns regarding the application of the PMLA and the ED’s approach to detaining individuals. The Supreme Court’s observations suggest a need for a more balanced application of the law, ensuring that individuals are not kept in custody without proper legal basis.
The Chhattisgarh liquor scam involves allegations of a syndicate of businessmen and bureaucrats running a parallel excise industry by collecting bribes from liquor retailers, resulting in significant financial losses to the state exchequer. The ED’s investigation into the matter is ongoing, with several individuals, including Tripathi, under scrutiny for their alleged roles in the scam.
India Building A Sanctions-Proof Supply Chain For Russian Oil 