Chhattisgarh liquor scam: Retired IAS officer Anil Tuteja sent to one-day judicial remand
Apr 21, 2024
Raipur (Chhattisgarh) [India], April 22 : Retired IAS officer Anil Tuteja on Sunday was remanded one-day judicial custody to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case linked to the alleged Rs 2000 crore liquor scam in the state.
Tuteja was taken into custody under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and produced before the court of 7th civil judge class-II Raipur and JMFC Raipur, Kumari Ranju Vaishnav, and was granted a one-day judicial remand.
Advocate Sourabh Pandey, representing the ED, said that they had sufficient reasons to believe that former Chhattisgarh-based IAS officer Anil Tuteja had committed a crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act following the interrogation of his son on Saturday and subsequently arrested him.
Sourabh Pandey told reporters, "... Yesterday, (Saturday) after interrogation of Anil Tuteja's son, Yash Tuteja, we found that we had sufficient reasons to believe that he has committed a crime under the Money Laundering Act... We arrested Anil Tuteja today (Sunday), and he was produced before the magistrate.
"We had asked for a custodial remand of 14 days. But we have been granted a one-day judicial remand of Anil Tuteja...," he further added.
Enforcement Directorate has arrested former IAS officer Anil Tuteja in a Prevention of Money Laundering case linked to an alleged liquor scam. The action was taken by the ED's Chhattisgarh regional office. This case was taken over by the investigation agency recently.
The ED had filed a fresh money laundering case in the alleged liquor scam case after the Supreme Court recently quashed its earlier FIR on a complaint by the Income Tax Department.
Earlier, the Supreme Court quashed a money laundering case against accused persons in a matter linked to the Chhattisgarh liquor scam, noting that the complaint was based on an IT Act offence, which is not a scheduled offence as per the PMLA.
The Supreme Court ruled that since there is a predicate offence, there cannot be proceeds of crime as well as no money laundering.
