The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed reservations about the potential hardship to co-accused while hearing a plea seeking the transfer of trial in a liquor scam case registered in both Chhattisgarh and Uttar Pradesh.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi heard submissions from senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Shoeb Alam, who represented Niranjan Das, a retired Chhattisgarh government officer and one of the accused in the multi-crore scam.
Das has approached the top court seeking the transfer of proceedings arising out of an FIR registered in Uttar Pradesh to Chhattisgarh, arguing that the allegations in both FIRs are substantially similar and stem from the same conspiracy related to manipulation of the excise policy between 2019 and 2022.
However, the bench pointed to an earlier ruling by a coordinate bench that observed the two sets of allegations to be “state-specific,” raising doubts about whether the cases could be merged or tried jointly.
The bench also highlighted practical concerns surrounding the proposed transfer. “In the UP FIR, there are co-accused from Uttar Pradesh also. If the trial is transferred in your case, they will also be affected,” CJI Surya Kant observed.
He specifically asked what would happen if a co-accused who is a permanent resident of Noida objects to being summoned to Raipur. “What if he says transfer it to Noida and don’t force me to go to Chhattisgarh? These are conflicting claims by the co-accused,” the bench remarked.
Rohatgi submitted that the said co-accused is also facing proceedings in Chhattisgarh and would eventually have to face trial there, but the bench remained cautious, stating that an order favoring one accused could impose undue hardship on others.
The court hinted that limited relief such as exemption from physical appearance could be considered, but cautioned against passing an order that would complicate matters for others. “We may end up passing an order that may cause great hardship to the co-accused,” the CJI said.
Rohatgi urged the court to hear the other accused before taking a final decision, noting that the outcome would inevitably affect all of them.
Taking note of the submissions, the bench ordered that all three related matters involving similar issues be heard together and listed them for joint hearing on January 19.
The alleged liquor scam pertains to manipulation of the Chhattisgarh excise policy during the tenure of the Bhupesh Baghel-led Congress government between 2019 and 2022. Investigating agencies claim the scam led to massive losses to the state exchequer while benefiting a powerful liquor syndicate.
The syndicate allegedly supplied unaccounted or illicit liquor through state-run shops using duplicate holograms and bottles, effectively creating a parallel trade network outside the books.
Multiple FIRs have been registered in both Chhattisgarh and Uttar Pradesh in connection with the scam, and the matter is under investigation by central agencies.
