In a significant development in the Chhattisgarh liquor scam investigations, the High Court at Bilaspur on Thursday granted regular bail to Chaitanya Baghel, who was arrested in cases registered by both the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Economic Offences Wing–Anti Corruption Bureau (EOW/ACB).
Justice Arvind Kumar Verma delivered two detailed orders, holding that prolonged pre-trial custody, selective arrests, and delay in commencement of trial weighed heavily in favour of bail.
Background of the Case
The cases stem from an alleged liquor syndicate operating in Chhattisgarh between 2019 and 2023, which investigators claim caused massive losses to the state exchequer.
The EOW/ACB registered FIR No. 04/2024 alleging offences under cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Based on this FIR, the ED initiated money laundering proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), alleging generation and laundering of over ₹2,000 crore in illegal proceeds.
Although several charge sheets and supplementary charge sheets were filed over many months, Chaitanya Baghel was not named as an accused in any of them. He was later arrested by the ED in July 2025 and subsequently taken into custody by the EOW in September 2025.
Submissions Before the Court
Senior counsel appearing for Baghel argued that his arrest was not supported by any recovery of illicit money, documents, or assets. It was pointed out that the prosecution relied largely on statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA and broad allegations of association, without any specific overt act.
The defence also highlighted that many co-accused, including those alleged to have played more direct roles in the liquor syndicate, had already been granted bail by constitutional courts.
On the other hand, the ED and the State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of economic offences and claiming that witness statements and digital material showed Baghel’s involvement in handling proceeds of crime.
Court’s Observations
After examining the record, the High Court noted that the applicant did not hold any official position in the excise department or state corporations linked to liquor procurement or sale.
The Court observed that despite extensive investigation, no proceeds of crime were recovered from Baghel. It also took note of the fact that trials in both the scheduled offences and the PMLA case were unlikely to conclude in the near future due to the sheer number of accused, witnesses, and documents involved.
“The right to personal liberty cannot be defeated by indefinite pre-trial incarceration,” the bench observed, adding that gravity of allegations alone cannot justify continued custody.
In the EOW case, the Court also expressed concern over the timing of the arrest, noting that Baghel was taken into custody after months of investigation, despite being available and cooperating.
Decision of the Court
Considering the absence of direct recovery, parity with co-accused already on bail, and the improbability of early trial, the High Court allowed both bail applications.
The Court ordered that Chaitanya Baghel be released on regular bail in the ED case as well as the EOW/ACB case, subject to strict conditions to ensure his presence during trial and to prevent any interference with the investigation.
Case Details:-
Chaitanya Baghel v. EOW,ACB
Chaitanya Baghel v. ED
Case Numbers
- ED / PMLA Case: MCRC No. 8716 of 2025
- EOW / ACB Case: MCRC No. 8224 of 2025
