Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi, Nov 21: A three-judge panel led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud will consider the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) request to move the Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) scam trial from Chhattisgarh to any other State.
In court today, the CJI himself stated the same. Along with the Chief Justice of India, the bench will also include Justices Ajay Rastogi and S. Ravindra Bhat, who were on the previous court that heard the case.
The parties had objected to the matter being scheduled in the past before Justice MR Shah. The case was previsouly being heard by then Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justices Ajay Rastogi and S Ravindra Bhat.
The case was eventually scheduled to be heard by a bench presided over by Justice MR Shah following the retirement of CJI Lalit.
The Chhattisgarh government objected to Justice Shah hearing the case, arguing that Justices Ajay Rastogi and S Ravindra Bhat, who were a part of the previous panel, should be assigned to hear it.
The CJI Chandrachud explained how the case was listed before Justice Shah during the hearing today and announced that he and Justices Bhat and Rastogi will now hear it.
“I will speak to both my brothers to see how the bench can be rejigged for them,” the CJI said.
When the Economic Offenses Investigation (EOI) and Anti-corruption Bureau, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, conducted raids on February 12, 2015, in various district offices and residences of the officers of Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation and Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation, including its headquarters at Raipur, and had registered a case against the officers, the multi-crore Public Distribution System scam from Chhattisgarh known as the NAN scam came to light.
ALSO READ: Shraddha murder case: PIL in Delhi HC seeks transfer of probe to CBI
Those implicated have been charged with providing rice, grams, salt, etc. of poor quality. Two IAS officers were the targets of a scam that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had filed a money laundering case in relation to.
Then, it moved the current petition, asking for the trial to be relocated from Chhattisgarh on the grounds that a top government official had been attempting to lessen the predicate offence against the accused.
In its counter-affidavit, the ED claimed that the defendants had contact with a Chhattisgarh High Court judge via constitutional officials who were aiding the defendants.
