Chhattisgarh tells Supreme Court former AG misused office but will not arrest him for now

The Supreme Court on Friday sought the response of the Chhattisgarh government to a plea filed by former Advocate General (AG) Satish Chandra Verma seeking anticipatory bail over his alleged role in the 'Nagarik Apurti Nigam' (NAN) scam..A Bench comprising of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice to the State on Verma's plea against an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court refusing relief.However, it did not pass any interim order after the State said that it will not arrest Verma till the next date of hearing of the matter on February 28.During the hearing, the State said the former AG blatantly misused his office to protect the accused persons in NAN scam while Verma said he is being hounded after the ruling dispensation in Chhattisgarh changed in 2023. .Background and High Court decision .Verma has been accused of helping other accused in the NAN scam by helping them get relief in court by misusing his position as the Advocate General.He has been implicated on the basis of certain WhatsApp chats between Verma and the NAN scam accused.The case arose after the Enforcement Directorate (ED) provided information to the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB)/Economic Offences Wing (EOW) regarding the large-scale 'NAN scam' under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), through a memo dated April 2, 2024.This included documents and digital evidence collected by the Income Tax Department under Section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against accused IAS officers Anil Tuteja and Alok Shukla.Based on this, the ED registered an ECIR and found that the accused IAS officers not only obstructed the investigation but also attempted to influence the trial in connivance with Chhattisgarh bureaucrats and constitutional officeholders. ACB/EOW confidentially verified the information before proceeding with the matter.During 2019-2020, Verma, then Advocate General, allegedly received undue advantages from the accused to influence ACB/EOW officers and manipulate replies favoring their anticipatory bail plea.Following this, an FIR was registered and an investigation commenced. Verma, fearing arrest, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)..When the matter came up before the High Court, it noted that Verma had attempted to influence those defending the bail plea to secure favorable outcomes for the accused IAS officers.After bail was granted to IAS officers, the ED challenged it before the Supreme Court and submitted WhatsApp chats retrieved by the IT Department, which led to the present case against Verma.The High Court observed that the chats suggested that the NAN scam accused, who were holding top positions in the State, facilitated Verma's appointment as Advocate General in exchange for favorable intervention in their case and while Verma did not personally appear in the bail proceedings, he had overall control over the AG’s office and was actively involved in manipulating the process.The High Court also noted Verma's deep-rooted connections in government, which could obstruct the investigation if bail is granted.Hence, it denied bail to Verma..Hearing today.When the case was heard today by Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of Verma, said that he is entitled to anticipatory bail as he is being roped in only on the basis of WhatsApp chats. Since he was the Advocate General, he has been made an accused on the basis of certain WhatsApp chats which he had with certain co-accused in the NAN Case, Rohatgi argued.A former Advocate General is being hounded only because there is a change in the dispensation and no offence whatsoever is made out on the basis of allegations, he contended..Chhattisgarh Deputy Advocate General Ravi Sharma and Standing Counsel Apoorv Shukla opposed the plea.Sharma stated that a bare reading of the WhatsApp chats showed the seriousness of the offence and misuse of the Advocate General's office by Verma. The allegations include charges of influencing the judicial system, it was argued.The counsel appearing for the State further submitted that the WhatsApp chats will convince the Court of the gravity of the offence and the same can be placed before the bench along with the State's counter-affidavit.The State also said that Verma will not be arrested until then. In view of the State's assurance, the Court did not pass any interim order but issued notice to the State.