LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Supreme Court questions evergreening of custody in Chhattisgarh liquor scam case, defers Anwar Dhebar’s bail plea

20/07/2026BlogNo Comments

The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the State of Chhattisgarh over what it described as the possible “evergreening of custody,” while hearing the bail plea of businessman Anwar Dhebar, one of the accused in the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam.

The Court expressed concern over the registration of a fresh FIR against Dhebar at a stage when he was reportedly on the verge of securing bail in earlier cases and sought the State’s response before adjourning the matter. It observed that although the latest prosecution arose from a separate FIR, the investigating agency had allegedly been aware of Dhebar’s involvement since 2023.

The Bench questioned why the FIR was registered only when the accused was nearing release on bail in the earlier cases. It indicated that its concern was whether successive prosecutions were being used to ensure the accused remained continuously in judicial custody despite becoming entitled to bail in previous cases.

Anwar Dhebar, brother of former Raipur Mayor Aijaz Dhebar, is among the principal accused in the alleged multi-crore liquor scam. According to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Chhattisgarh Economic Offences Wing (EOW), a liquor syndicate operated in the State between 2019 and 2022, allegedly siphoning off hundreds of crores of rupees through illegal commissions and manipulation of liquor sales.

Appearing for Dhebar, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave submitted that his client had already spent nearly two-and-a-half years in custody and argued that each time he became eligible for bail, a fresh criminal case was initiated against him, effectively frustrating his release.

Responding to the Court’s concerns, counsel for the State maintained that the present prosecution arose from an independent FIR and denied that the investigation amounted to an attempt to “evergreen” Dhebar’s custody.

The State submitted that the investigation had entered a critical phase following the arrest of another key accused who had allegedly been absconding for four years. It argued that the case involved financial transactions running into several hundred crores of rupees and that further investigation was necessary.

According to the State, the probe relates to the attachment of assets worth Rs 300–400 crore, while alleging that nearly Rs 1,000 crore in cash had been routed through the present accused. It sought two weeks to complete the remaining investigation, contending that the present case was based on fresh material collected during the investigation and not intended to prolong the accused’s incarceration.

The prosecution also informed the Court that separate investigations had emerged from multiple Enforcement Directorate Enforcement Case Information Reports (ECIRs), resulting in distinct FIRs.

The Bench, however, remained unconvinced and repeatedly questioned why Dhebar had not been formally arrested in the present case earlier, particularly when he had remained in judicial custody in connected matters and was readily available for interrogation.

Reiterating his submissions, Dave argued that successive arrests in new FIRs had the practical effect of nullifying bail orders. Counsel for the accused argued that the State was attempting to “evergreen” his custody by continuously introducing fresh charges. He submitted that his client had already spent two and a half years in detention and that the cycle of registering new cases every time he neared release on bail must end.

Seeking additional time, the State informed the Court that it intended to file one final supplementary charge sheet before concluding the investigation and assured the Bench that the probe would be completed within two weeks. Taking note of the rival submissions, the Supreme Court granted the state time to file its response and deferred further hearing on Dhebar’s bail plea.

The post Supreme Court questions evergreening of custody in Chhattisgarh liquor scam case, defers Anwar Dhebar’s bail plea appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Recent Changes in ITR Forms: What Taxpayers Need to Know
  • The Journey of Tax Reforms in India: Comparison of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the 2025 Tax Regime
  • Delhi Police to Delhi HighCourt: Surveillance of CJP protesters was for security, not snooping
  • Delhi High Court summons AIIMS Director and Emergency Medicine specialist treating Sonam Wangchuk in hospital transfer matter
  • Supreme Court warns against politicising Ayodhya Ram Mandir fund embezzlement case, to examine SIT probe

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.