Chhattisgarh high court rejects official, businessman’s bail plea in liquor case
Justice Arvind Kumar Verma ruled that releasing the two accused on bail would not be appropriate given the seriousness of the allegations against them
RAIPUR: The Chhattisgarh high court on Monday rejected bail petitions filed by a senior suspended state government official Arunapati Tripathi and businessman Trilok Dhillon in the ₹2,200 crore liquor case, citing the gravity of the charges levelled against them by the Economic Offence Wing (EOW).
Justice Arvind Kumar Verma ruled that releasing the two accused on bail would not be appropriate given the seriousness of the allegations against them.
In separate petitions, the two accused also questioned the first information report filed by EOW. The high court had reserved its verdict on September 17 after completion of the arguments.
Arunapati Tripathi, who was special secretary of the excise department and former managing director of Chhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation Limited (CSMCL), was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate last year in connection with the liquor case.
EOW also initiated a probe into the case and the use of counterfeit holograms. Tripathi and Dhillon were arrested by EOW in May 2024.
The accused then approached the high court, challenging their arrests. And the second FIR filed by EOW.
“The court acknowledged that the applicant has been in custody since May 8, 2024, and several witnesses are yet to be examined by the EOW, with the trial not yet commenced. However, substantial evidence indicates a strong connection between the applicant and other accused persons in the crime, including numerous cash transactions and illegal wealth accumulation,” the high court said.
The order added that considering the facts, the nature of the charges, the severity of the punishment, and the Supreme Court’s decisions in previous cases, the court emphasized that corruption is a violation of human rights, especially regarding life, liberty, equality, and non-discrimination.
“It obstructs the realization of all human rights. Given the serious accusations and the evidence against the applicant, the court concluded that it would not be appropriate to release the applicant on regular bail,” it added.