Overview
- A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued notice on Baghel’s appeal against the Chhattisgarh High Court order that upheld his July arrest in the alleged ₹2,000 crore liquor scam.
- The judges identified interpretation of Section 193 and the permissible duration of “further investigation” without advancing the trial as the central questions.
- Baghel’s lawyers argued he was never summoned under PMLA Section 50 and that alleged non-cooperation could not justify arrest under Section 19.
- Representing the ED, ASG S. V. Raju said statements of other accused have been recorded, evidence exists, and an earlier Supreme Court directive gave the agency three months to complete aspects of its probe.
- In a separate petition, Baghel has challenged the constitutional validity of PMLA Section 50, which the court directed to be listed with a pending batch of similar challenges.