LI Network
Published on: 09 August 2023 at 11:31 IST
The Supreme Court issued directive to the Uttar Pradesh Police, instructing them to refrain from taking any coercive actions against Anil Tuteja, an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer from Chhattisgarh, and his son Yash Tuteja.
This interim measure comes in response to an FIR filed against them by the UP Police regarding their alleged involvement in the creation of duplicate holograms linked to a liquor scam case. However, the court’s order does not impede the ongoing investigation by the UP Police.
The bench, composed of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, issued this order on August 7. In the same ruling, the Additional Solicitor General of India was granted time to gather information on the potential connection between the UP Police case and the money laundering investigation against the Tutejas.
The Supreme Court had previously put a hold on the money laundering investigation on July 18.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the Tutejas, argued that the UP Police filed the FIR on July 30 as a way to circumvent the Supreme Court’s July 18 order, which stayed proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
In response, ASG SV Raju contended that the case filed by the UP Police pertained to violations of the Income Tax Act, which was separate from the hologram-related offense. He explained that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had information regarding the hologram issue before the July 18 order and was obligated to pass on this information to the UP Police.
The Supreme Court bench, while scheduling the matter for further consideration on August 21, issued the following directive:
“While we are not impeding the investigation, the Uttar Pradesh Police may not take any coercive steps until the next hearing.”
The ED has described Anil Tuteja as the central figure in an illegal liquor supply syndicate in Chhattisgarh.
During the previous hearing, the bench had noted that the ED’s complaint pertained to an offense under the Income Tax Act. Furthermore, the court observed that the appropriate court had not yet taken cognizance of the predicate offense.
Considering these factors, the court ordered on July 18: “the concerned respondent authorities must stay their hands in all manner.”
The courtroom discussion revolved around the intention behind the previous order and the ED’s subsequent actions. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi questioned the legitimacy of the UP Police’s FIR in light of the Supreme Court’s prior directive.
The Supreme Court’s next session is scheduled to further deliberate on the matter on August 21, during which the UP Police is expected to withhold any coercive measures while investigations continue.