Former AG Misused Office But Will Not Arrest Him For Now: Chhattisgarh Tells Supreme Court

New Delhi: Amid row over 'Nagarik Apurti Nigam' (NAN) scam, the Supreme Court on Friday sought the response of the Chhattisgarh government to a plea by former AG Satish Chandra Verma for anticipatory bail.

A Bench led by Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued a notice to the Chhattisgarh government on Verma's plea challenging the High Court's refusal to grant relief.

The Court did not issue any interim order after the State assured it would not arrest Verma until the next hearing on February 28.

State Accuses Former AG of Misusing Office

During the hearing, the State accused the former AG of blatantly misusing his office to shield the accused in the NAN scam, while Verma claimed he was being targeted following the change in the ruling dispensation in Chhattisgarh in 2023.

Chhattisgarh Deputy Advocate General Ravi Sharma and Standing Counsel Apoorv Shukla opposed the plea for anticipatory bail.

Sharma argued that a simple reading of the WhatsApp chats revealed the severity of the offense and the misuse of the Advocate General's office by Verma. He further stated that the allegations included attempts to influence the judicial system.

The State's counsel also submitted that the WhatsApp chats would demonstrate the gravity of the offense, and they could be presented to the Court along with the State's counter-affidavit.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Verma, argued that his client was entitled to anticipatory bail as he was being implicated solely based on WhatsApp chats.

Rohatgi pointed out that as the former Advocate General, Verma was made an accused based on WhatsApp chats he had with certain co-accused in the NAN case.

Earlier Verdicts of High Court in NAN Scam Case

When the matter was heard by 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 the IAS officers, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenged the decision before the Supreme Court. The ED presented WhatsApp chats retrieved by the IT Department, which formed the basis of the case against Verma.

The High Court observed that the chats suggested that the accused in the NAN scam, who held high positions in the State, had facilitated Verma’s appointment as Advocate General in exchange for favorable intervention in their case. Although Verma did not personally appear in the bail proceedings, the Court noted he had overall control over the AG’s office and was actively involved in manipulating the process.

The High Court further highlighted Verma’s deep-rooted connections in government, which could potentially obstruct the investigation if bail were granted.

Hence, bail was denied to Verma.