Supreme Court Rebukes ED, Says Probe Agency ‘Should Think of Others’ Fundamental Rights Too’

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday expressed concerns over the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) plea seeking the transfer of the Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) scam case from Chhattisgarh to New Delhi, urging the agency to consider the fundamental rights of individuals involved in the case.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan questioned how the ED filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, which is typically reserved for individuals seeking redress for violations of their fundamental rights. 

Article 32 empowers citizens to approach the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of their constitutional rights.

Court's Observations on ED's Writ Petition

The bench's remarks came as the ED sought to transfer the case, which involves the alleged multi-crore Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) scam, to Delhi. 

Justices Oka and Bhuyan pointed out the misuse of Article 32, emphasizing that it is primarily designed for individual grievances and not for agencies. 

While hearing the case, the bench further questioned why the ED, an institution, was invoking a constitutional provision meant for individual fundamental rights. 

"If ED has fundamental rights, it should think about the fundamental rights of people too," the court said. 

ED Withdraws Petition After Court’s Remark

Following the court’s pointed observations, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, representing the ED, sought permission to withdraw the petition. 

The bench granted the request, allowing the ED to withdraw its plea. 

The NAN Scam Case

The NAN scam dates back to 2015, when the Chhattisgarh Anti-Corruption Bureau raided the offices of Nagrik Apurti Nigam, the agency responsible for the public distribution system (PDS) in the state. 

The raids uncovered unaccounted cash amounting to Rs 3.64 crore, along with sub-standard rice and salt samples deemed unfit for human consumption.

At the heart of the investigation are former IAS officer Anil Tuteja, who was the chairperson of NAN, and Shukla, the managing director. 

The Enforcement Directorate’s case, filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), builds on earlier charges filed by the Chhattisgarh Police’s Economic Offences Wing and the Anti-Corruption Bureau.