The Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice to the Centre and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) after hearing a petition filed by Chaitanya Baghel, the son of former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, who has challenged his arrest in the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam case. The matter was taken up by a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, which directed the Centre and the ED to file their responses within ten days.
During the hearing, senior advocates Kapil Sibal and N Hariharan, appearing for Chaitanya Baghel, questioned the legality of the arrest and accused the ED of violating procedure under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Sibal argued that the arrest was made on the ground of non-cooperation even though no notice or summons had ever been issued to his client. He submitted that Section 19 of the PMLA does not allow the ED to arrest anyone without first serving notice and allowing the person to appear for questioning. He described the arrest as unlawful and arbitrary, asserting that the agency had acted in violation of due process.
Supporting this view, Hariharan told the court that the ED was intentionally prolonging the investigation to keep their client in custody. He urged the bench to quash the grounds of arrest, claiming that the agency was showing no intention of concluding the inquiry. The bench, while noting these submissions, observed that the issue before the court was not merely about the grounds of arrest but also about how the law should be interpreted with respect to the duration of custody. Justice Surya Kant remarked that the larger question was how long an accused person could be kept in custody under such circumstances.
In response, Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju, representing the Centre and the ED, informed the court that sufficient time had already been granted by the Supreme Court to complete the investigation, with a three-month deadline in place.
Earlier, on October 17, 2025, the Chhattisgarh High Court had dismissed Chaitanya Baghel’s plea challenging his arrest, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court. Baghel has claimed that his detention is illegal and that procedural irregularities by the ED have rendered the entire process void. The ED, on the other hand, has accused him of laundering a portion of the alleged proceeds of crime through shell companies and real estate investments linked to the liquor scam.
The Supreme Court’s notice marks an important development in the ongoing case, as the Centre and the ED are now required to submit their responses within ten days. The case is expected to return to the bench for further hearing after the responses are filed.
Disclaimer: This content has been produced and published by Local Law Media Network for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice.
