New Delhi, August 19 (HBTV): The Supreme Court on Monday permitted former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel and his son Chaitanya Baghel to move the Chhattisgarh High Court in connection with multiple cases being investigated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, including the alleged Rs two thousand one hundred sixty-one crore liquor scam.
Chaitanya Baghel was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate on July 18 in relation to the liquor scam. The Central agency is probing the matter under provisions of the money laundering law. The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, also allowed Chaitanya Baghel to approach the High Court with his plea seeking interim bail.
Bhupesh Baghel has sought protection from coercive action, including arrest, in connection with several cases that span a range of alleged irregularities. These include the liquor scam in Chhattisgarh, the Mahadev App betting scam, rice milling irregularities, the District Mineral Foundation scam, the coal levy case, and the Uttar Pradesh liquor scam. He has also been named in investigations by the Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force into excise irregularities and by the Central Bureau of Investigation concerning Jharkhand’s excise policy.
In his plea, the former Chief Minister argued that he is facing numerous criminal proceedings initiated between 2015 and 2025. He contended that investigating agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate and the CBI have been filing incomplete charge sheets in a piecemeal manner without concluding their probes. According to him, this practice is intended to deny him the right to default bail under Section 187(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, previously Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. He argued that such powers of ‘further investigation,’ without adequate safeguards, enable arbitrary and prolonged inquiries that infringe fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution.
Baghel also questioned the legality of his son’s arrest, contending that it was part of the same series of cases. In a separate petition, he challenged the constitutionality of Sections 50 and 63 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, arguing that these provisions violate the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) by compelling individuals to give statements under the threat of arrest or penalty.
The petition further claimed that the Enforcement Directorate has been exercising powers of ‘further investigation’ not authorised under the law, thereby prolonging detention and enabling harassment. The court, while declining to grant immediate relief, observed that Baghel should approach the jurisdictional High Court with his grievance.
The Supreme Court, however, agreed to hear arguments on the constitutional validity of PMLA provisions at a later stage and posted the matter for August six. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi represented Bhupesh Baghel, while senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Chaitanya Baghel. Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju represented the Central agencies. (ANI)