Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

A Bench comprising CJI U.U. Lalit, Justice Ajay Rastogi, and Justice Ravindra Bhat, while hearing a plea by the Enforcement Directorate, where transfer of investigation to CBI was sought for, has directed to hear the matter further, on Thursday. The matter pertains to the Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) Scam (also PDS scam) in Chattisgarh, where two IAS officers were allegedly involved, along with other High officials who then connived with the accused persons.

It was argued by Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, that the number of witnesses who have turned hostile in the matter, is noteworthy and something that makes the case apparent. He submitted, that of the total 100 plus witnesses, 72 turned hostile. And the documents that have been placed on record in sealed cover, has relevance to the same. He further submitted that the records, documents and WhatsApp chats show and establish that SIT was connected with the accused, in hampering the investigation, and also threatened the witnesses. Earlier, the Bench had directed the parties to place the materials in a sealed cover.

Court has directed to file all the names of the witnesses in the matter by tomorrow.

Further stated that a Senior Officer, other members of SIT and the accused threatened the witnesses. SG also submitted that he is not challenging the bail granted for the predicate offence, and says that "...there is an overall prejudice to the trial". Involvement of the Chief Minister in the entire matrix was also alleged, where SG cited an incidence of the Chief Minister meeting the accused, 2 days before he was granted bail. And commented, that "if this does not shake the conscience of the Court, then nothing can". In view of the entire submissions, SG Mehta, asked the Court to take a holistic picture of all the material so placed. 

Court then was of the opinion that since it was being projected (on which the locus depends) that the investigation was shoddy and compromised, therefore the party should also be able to see the documents, to ensure fairness. SG had contended in his arguments that the investigation was compromised, from the chats emanating from the person in-charge. The names, however, were not revealed. 

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohtagi, objected and requested the Court, while it was in a process of passing directions for exchanging documents in sealed cover, "that he appearing for the accused, object the documents to be given to Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal", and would want them to be given to him also.

The Supreme Court had earlier issued notice in Enforcement Directorate's (ED) plea seeking cancellation of bail granted by the Chhattisgarh High Court to IAS officers accused in the Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) scam.

A bench of the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli had directed the respondents to file their counter to the writ petition.

Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the respondents objected to the petition, and were directed to file their counter in the plea. Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appearing for ED requested the bench to keep the matters for arguments, stating that the matters would need arguments.

Case Title: The Director, Directorate of Enforcement vs. Anil Tuteja and Ors.