New Delhi, Aug 4 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday censured the practice of affluent persons coming to it directly seeking reliefs in criminal cases as it asked former Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Baghel and his son to go to the high court in cases probed by central investigating agencies.

The matters relate to the alleged liquor scam in Chhattisgarh and other cases.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi asked the father and son duo why should the top court go into their pleas against FIR, arrest and remand and Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provisions.

The top court asked why did the petitioners not move the high court, which too were constitutional courts and could adjudicate the issue.

"This is the problem we are facing. Why can't the high court decide the issue otherwise what is the use of having those courts? This is the new trend, when an affluent person approaches the Supreme Court, we start changing our directions. If this keeps on happening, then ordinary persons and their ordinary lawyers will not have a space in the Supreme Court," the bench said.

Bhupesh Baghel and Chitanya Baghel in separate pleas moved the top court challenging coercive action by probe agencies and provisions of the PMLA.

Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said "this phenomenon of arrest" was happening across the country and investigating agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate was filing piecemeal chargesheets and implicating anybody and arresting everybody.

"This cannot go on. People are not named in the FIR or initial chargesheets but suddenly their names crop up in supplementary chargesheet and the person is arrested," Sibal, representing the former chief minister, said.

Singhvi, appearing for Baghel's son, said his client was not named in two-three chargesheets but his house was raided all of a sudden in March and he was subsequently arrested after his name featured in one of the supplementary chargesheets.

Sibal argued the ED was acting in violation of the law laid down by the top court in its 2022 verdict, which upheld its power to arrest.

As a result, Sibal said, the plea challenged the validity of Section 50 and 63 of the PMLA dealing with power of authorities to summon persons, compel the production of documents and record evidence during investigations and punishment for giving false statements.

The bench asked if ED was not following the law or deviated from the procedure, did anyone bring it to court's notice or challenge the actions of the probe agencies.

The bench said the apex court has previously held that further probe after filing of the chargesheet could only happen with the permission of the court.

"There are instances where law can be valid but the action can be invalid," the bench said and asked both the petitioners to bring the facts to the notice of the high court.

The bench pointed out the "intertwined" nature of facts in the pleas, making it difficult to segregate them.

On the challenge to Sections 50 and 63 of the PMLA, the bench said both petitioners could file fresh writ petitions and the court would hear them with the pending matters.

The top court then allowed them to move the high court, which was asked to accord them expeditious hearing.

Additional Solicitor General S V Raju said the former CM was no body to the litigation as he was not named in the FIR or the chargesheet in any of the cases but he still moved the apex court.

When Justice Bagchi asked Raju to make a statement that he wouldn't be booked or arrested in future, Raju refused to make any such statement at the moment and said everything depended on the investigation.

Justice Bagchi told Raju, "Then you are not clear. We cannot leave a citizen's liberty at lurch. He has a right to challenge the provisions." Investigation agencies including the CBI and ED are probing several cases including coal scam, liquor scam, Mahadev betting app cases, Rice mills cases and DMF scam cases, which allegedly happened during the tenure of Bhupesh Baghel as the chief minister.

In July, Chaitanya was arrested in a money laundering case related to the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam. PTI MNL MNL AMK AMK

High Court jurisdiction: top court directs petitioners to move high court for challenge to PMLA provisions. The Supreme Court rebuked affluent petitioners for approaching it directly in criminal probes and directed former CM Bhupesh Baghel and his son to move the high court. The petitioners challenged coercive actions by investigating agencies and PMLA provisions authorising summons, document production and penalties for false statements, alleging arrests via supplementary chargesheets. The bench observed that further probe after filing a chargesheet requires court permission, allowed fresh writs against the PMLA provisions, and instructed the high court to accord expeditious hearing while noting that lawful provisions can be misapplied.