New Delhi [India], August 4 : The Supreme Court on Monday allowed former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel and his son Chaitanya Baghel to approach the High Court challenging the probe in various scams, including the alleged Rs 2,161-crore liquor scam.
Chaitanya Baghel was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on July 18, 2025, in connection with the scam. The Central agency is investigating the scam under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Bhupesh Baghel sought protection from coercive action -- including arrest -- in multiple FIRs filed against him in connection with the state's liquor scam, Mahadev App scam, rice milling scam, District Mineral Foundation (DMF) scam, coal scam and the Uttar Pradesh liquor scam.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi also allowed the Congress leaders' son Chaitanya Baghel to approach the High Court with his plea seeking interim bail.
In Bhupesh Baghel's plea, the Congress leader has stated that he is facing several criminal proceedings initiated between 2015 and 2025. These include cases filed by ACB/EOW Raipur alleging irregularities in procurement, rice milling, the District Mineral Foundation (DMF), and coal levy scams.
He is also under investigation by the Uttar Pradesh STF in connection with a liquor scam, and by the CBI concerning Jharkhand's excise policy. Additional cases involve a betting scam linked to the Mahadev App, another liquor scam, alleged invoice fraud in manpower contracts, and WhatsApp chats that form the basis of further CBI investigations. The alleged offences involve violations under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Baghel stated that investigation agencies -- ED and CBI have been filing incomplete charge sheets in a piecemeal manner, often without concluding investigations, to deny him the right to default bail under Section 187(3) of the BNSS (previously Section 167(2) CrPC).
He further contended that these aforesaid provisions, which permit 'further investigation' without adequate procedural safeguards, confer unfettered discretion on investigating agencies, enabling arbitrary and prolonged investigations that violate the fundamental rights to equality, personal liberty, and fair trial under Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution of India.
In this plea, Baghel has also questioned his son, Chaitanya Baghel's recent arrest in connection with the cases mentioned above. Thus, he is seeking protection from any coercive action that he apprehends.
With regard to the aforesaid plea, the Court has asked Baghel to approach the jurisdictional High Court.
In his other plea, Baghel had challenged the constitutionality of Sections 50 and 63 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), because they violate fundamental rights under Articles 14, 20(3), and 21.
He contends that these provisions compel individuals to give self-incriminating statements under threat of penalty or arrest, infringing the right to silence and protection against self-incrimination.
The petition also challenges the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) alleged unauthorised use of "further investigation" powers, claiming that the PMLA does not grant such powers, and that the ED's actions--such as filing incomplete prosecution complaints--lead to arbitrary detention, harassment, and violations of due process.
As regards his other plea, the top court stated that it may consider hearing these issues and posted the matter to August 6.
Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi represented Bhupesh Baghel, and Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Chaitanya Baghel. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju represented Central agencies.