The Supreme Court on Monday expressed concern over what it described as the possible “evergreening of custody” while hearing the bail plea of businessman Anwar Dhebar, an accused in the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam. The Court questioned the State of Chhattisgarh over the timing of a fresh FIR registered against Dhebar when he was on the verge of securing bail in earlier cases and granted the State time to respond before posting the matter for further hearing.
The accused, brother of former Raipur Mayor Aijaz Dhebar, is one of the key accused in the alleged multi-crore Chhattisgarh liquor scam. The Enforcement Directorate and the Chhattisgarh Economic Offences Wing allege that a liquor syndicate operated between 2019 and 2022, causing massive loss to the state exchequer through illegal commissions and manipulation of liquor sales.
Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Dhebar, submitted that his client had already spent nearly two-and-a-half years in custody and argued that successive criminal cases were being used to prevent his release despite progress in earlier matters.
Questioning the State over the registration of the latest FIR, the Bench observed:
“
“This was a distinct, separate FIR, but that trap was made in 2023. Information came to you about his involvement in 2023. You decided to register the FIR only when he was on the verge of getting bail in the other cases. You can take your time in registering an FIR, but isn’t custody enough?”
The Court indicated that it was concerned with whether the fresh arrest amounted to an attempt to prolong detention despite the accused remaining continuously in judicial custody.
Responding to the Court’s observations, counsel for the State submitted that the present prosecution stemmed from an independent FIR and denied that it was a case of “evergreening of custody.”
Opposing the plea, the State argued that the investigation had reached a crucial stage following the arrest of another key accused who had allegedly remained absconding for four years. It submitted that the probe involved allegations relating to transactions running into hundreds of crores of rupees and that further custodial investigation was necessary.
“
“We have arrested a very vital man who had been absconding for four years. The investigation concerns attachment of ₹300-400 crores. This man had taken ₹1,000 crores through the present accused in cash. We need two weeks to wind up this investigation. This is not a case of evergreening of custody. This arises from a distinct and separate FIR.”
The State further explained that the National Investigation Agency had acted on information received through multiple Enforcement Directorate ECIRs, following which separate investigations culminated in independent FIRs.
The Bench, however, remained unconvinced and repeatedly questioned why Dhebar was not arrested earlier despite the investigating agency being aware of his alleged involvement since 2023, particularly when he had remained in judicial custody in connected cases and was available for interrogation.
Countering the State’s submissions, Dhebar’s counsel argued that repeated arrests in successive FIRs effectively defeated the grant of bail.
“
“This is another attempt at evergreening. Every time I get bail, there is a new case. I have spent two and a half years in custody. This cannot continue like this.”
Seeking additional time, the State submitted that the investigation was in its final stages and informed the Court that it intended to file one last supplementary charge sheet before concluding the probe. It urged the Bench to defer consideration of the bail plea for two weeks, assuring that the remaining investigation would be completed within that period.
Taking note of the submissions, the Supreme Court granted the State time to complete its response and deferred further hearing.