Supreme Court Grants Protection to Former Chhattisgarh Advocate General SC Verma in Anticipatory Bail Plea
The Supreme Court of India has issued a notice in the anticipatory bail plea of former Chhattisgarh Advocate General SC Verma, who is facing allegations in connection with the ‘Nagarik Apurti Nigam’ (NAN) scam. The state’s legal counsel assured the Court that no coercive action would be taken against Verma until the next hearing.
Court Proceedings and Legal Arguments
A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta took note of the submissions made by both parties and scheduled the matter for hearing on February 2. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Verma, argued that his client was being unfairly implicated in the case based solely on WhatsApp chats. He contended that Verma, in his capacity as Advocate General, had routine conversations with various individuals, which should not be construed as criminal involvement.
On the other hand, the Chhattisgarh government, represented by Deputy Advocate General Ravi Sharma and Standing Counsel Apoorv Shukla, strongly opposed the anticipatory bail plea. The state maintains that Verma misused his constitutional position to influence case outcomes in favor of high-ranking officials involved in the scandal.
Allegations in the NAN Scam
Verma is accused of leveraging his role to protect certain individuals implicated in the NAN scam, a major corruption case linked to the procurement and distribution of food supplies. Investigative agencies claim that he played a pivotal role in influencing judicial processes to shield powerful figures.
Next Steps in the Legal Battle
With the Supreme Court’s intervention, Verma has been granted temporary relief from arrest. The next hearing on February 2 will determine whether he will receive anticipatory bail or face further legal proceedings. The case continues to draw significant attention, as it involves allegations of corruption and misuse of power at the highest levels of governance.
As the legal process unfolds, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court’s decision, which could set a precedent for similar high-profile cases involving constitutional officeholders.
