Chhattisgarh NAN Scam | Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail Of Anil Tuteja & Alok Shukla, Orders 4 Weeks' ED Custody

The Supreme Court recently set aside the anticipatory bail granted to former IAS officer Anil Tuteja and co-accused Alok Shukla in the 2015 Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) scam relating to corruption in the Public Distribution System (PDS) in Chhattisgarh.

A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma passed the order in the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) appeals challenging the anticipatory bail granted by the Chhattisgarh High Court in 2020.

The ED had submitted that because of the anticipatory bail granted to Tuteja and Shukla, it could not file the prosecution complaint under the PMLA. Further, it argued that Tuteja and Shukla are misusing the anticipatory bail.

The ED has alleged that there was collusion between senior state officials and the accused, influence over witnesses, and attempts to stall proceedings. It has claimed that the judge who granted bail had met the Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh two days earlier and WhatsApp conversations between the accused show alleged political interference.

In the order, the Court said that it had perused the impugned orders and the materials on record, but examining the material at this stage would be detrimental to further proceedings and might influence the Trial Court.

“Suffice it is to state that it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail, but considering the said materials at this stage would be detrimental to the further proceedings and, therefore, might influence the Trial Court”, the Court said.

Accordingly, the Court set aside the anticipatory bail granted to Shukla and Tuteja, then Chairman and Managing Director of NAN, and directed that they be taken into custody by the ED for a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. He was granted one week's time to surrender and directed to cooperate with the ED to facilitate completion of the investigation and filing of the complaint.

The Court directed that after completion of the four-week custody, both respondents shall be released if not required in any other case, subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the Trial Court.

The Case

The case stems from a 2015 FIR registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau/Economic Offences Wing alleging large-scale corruption in procurement of substandard rice under the PDS. It named Shiv Shankar Bhatt and 26 others, including then NAN Chairman Alok Shukla and then IAS officer Anil Tuteja. They are accused under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Sections 109 and 120B of the IPC.

The ED registered an ECIR on January 9, 2019 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. It claims Shukla and Tuteja received Rs. 2.21 crore and Rs. 1.51 crore respectively between May 2014 and February 2015 through illegal collection of money for procurement of substandard rice. A pen drive seized from Tuteja's personal assistant allegedly contained details of these transactions.

Both accused moved the Chhattisgarh High Court for anticipatory bail in 2020 after the ED issued summons. They cited their cooperation during investigation and the lack of necessity for custodial interrogation. The High Court granted bail, ruling that Section 45 of the PMLA, as interpreted in Nikesh Tarachand Shah, was inapplicable to anticipatory bail proceedings.

The ED challenged the High Court's decision before the Supreme Court.

In July 2024, a bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih expressed concern that despite the 2019 ECIR, the ED had yet to complete the investigation. The Court directed the agency to file an affidavit to show that Tuteja and Shukla were misusing their bail. ASG SV Raju told the bench that filing such an affidavit would “paint a very bad picture of the judiciary.”

On September 27, 2024, the Supreme Court ordered Tuteja to respond to ED allegations that he manipulated the judiciary to obtain bail. The ED relied on affidavits filed by the State of Chhattisgarh alleging chats showing subversion of the judiciary, including the involvement of the former Advocate General.

Throughout, the ED maintained that Tuteja and Shukla misused their anticipatory bail and obstructed its probe into corruption in Chhattisgarh's PDS.

Case no. – Directorate of Enforcement v. Anil Tuteja and Ors.

Case Title – SLP(Crl.) No. 6323-6324/2020

Click Here To Read/Download Order