Supreme Court Grants Bail to Ex-IAS Officer Anil Tuteja in Chhattisgarh Liquor Scam Case

New Dehi: The Supreme Court of India has granted bail to former IAS officer Anil Tuteja, who was arrested in connection with a money laundering case linked to the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam. A bench comprising Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued the order, citing procedural irregularities and prolonged incarceration as primary reasons.

Anil Tuteja, arrested on 21 April 2024 following a complaint filed under Section 44 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), had been in custody for nearly a year. The Supreme Court’s attention was drawn to an order passed by the Chhattisgarh High Court on 2 April 2025, which had set aside the Special Court’s order taking cognizance against Tuteja. The High Court had ruled that prior sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), corresponding to Section 218 of the BNSS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023), was mandatory and had not been obtained.

Notably, the apex court highlighted that the High Court’s order had not been challenged, leaving no existing cognizance order against Tuteja. The bench noted the appellant’s prolonged custody, emphasizing the application of the principle laid down in the Senthil Balaji judgment, which advocates bail in circumstances of extended detention without cognizance.

“The appellant has undergone incarceration of about a year. There are more than 20 accused, and over 30 prosecution witnesses have been cited,” the bench observed. Furthermore, the Supreme Court referred to its own earlier order dated 12 February 2025, granting bail to a co-accused under similar circumstances.

The Additional Solicitor General (ASG) appeared for the respondent and expressed concerns regarding Tuteja’s potential to influence witnesses and interfere with the investigation. Responding to this apprehension, the Supreme Court prescribed stringent bail conditions, including surrender of the passport and furnishing an undertaking to cooperate fully and punctually with future proceedings if the special Court subsequently takes cognizance.

The Court further directed the Central Government to urgently appoint a Sessions Judge under Section 43(1) of the PMLA to constitute the Special Court, as the post is currently vacant. It specified that the appellant be produced before the principal district and sessions judge for completing the bail formalities, subject to stringent terms. The bench clarified that non-cooperation by the appellant would enable the prosecution to seek cancellation of his bail.

This decision represents significant judicial intervention, underscoring the necessity of procedural compliance in cases involving public officials accused under special laws like the PMLA.