A general view of the Supreme Court.
| Photo Credit: SHASHI SHEKHAR KASHYAP
The Supreme Court on April 8 either quashed or simply disposed of complaints of money laundering against former IAS officer Anil Tuteja, his son Yash and others in the alleged ₹2,000 crore liquor scam in Chhattisgarh, saying there were no scheduled offences nor proceeds of crime involved.
A Bench headed by Justice A.S. Oka said the Tutejas had not been even named as accused in the complaint. Since there was none of scheduled offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) involved in the case, it would be purposeless for the trial judge to even apply his mind on whether to take cognisance or not.
The court quashed the complaint against Anwar Dhebar and Arun Pati Tripathi, who were both named accused in the case.
Noting that Siddharth Singhania and the Tutejas were not even accused in the complaint, the court said “if there are no proceeds of the crime, obviously no offence is made out”.
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Directorate of Enforcement, said the agency was “likely to initiate” a fresh First Information Report which involves scheduled offences under the PMLA.
The court said it was not necessary for it to go into proceedings which may only be “likely initiated”.
On Friday, the Bench had clearly indicated its intention to quash the case.
“We have gone through the ECIR [Enforcement Case Information Report] and the FIR lodged in the case. We find that there is no predicate offence and there are no proceeds of crime. If there are no proceeds of crime, then there is no money laundering. We will quash this complaint,” Justice Oka had told Mr. Raju.
Senior advocate Siddharth Aggarwal, appearing for the Tutejas, had said there were other accused persons in the case and the complaint against them should also be quashed.
The ED had portrayed Mr. Anil Tuteja as the “kingpin” of the syndicate involved in illegal supply of liquor in Chhattisgarh. The earlier Congress government in Chhattisgarh had alleged in the top court that the probe agency was “running amok” and trying to implicate then Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel in the money laundering case.
