Today, On 26th November, In the Andhra Pradesh Liquor Scam, The Supreme Court questioned the necessity of keeping accused individuals in custody. It granted temporary protection from arrest to the Ex-CM’s officials and a cement firm director involved in the high-profile case.
The Supreme Court granted temporary relief to three individuals implicated in the alleged liquor scam in Andhra Pradesh, allowing them to avoid immediate surrender as ordered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which had canceled their default bail.
The beneficiaries of this relief include retired IAS officer K. Dhanunjaya Reddy, who previously served as Secretary in the Chief Minister’s Office, former OSD to ex-CM Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Krishna Mohan Reddy, and Balaji Govindappa, Director at Bharati Cements.
The High Court mandated that they surrender by November 26 and subsequently seek regular bail from the trial judge.
A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, issued a notice regarding their special leave petitions that contest the High Court’s decision and have stayed the requirement for surrender in the meantime.
The Court noted the complexity of the case, highlighting that with nearly 200 witnesses involved, the trial is likely to be drawn out.
Suggesting that the Court is inclined to consider bail under strict conditions to avoid any possible interference with witnesses, CJI Surya Kant asked the State,
“What is the necessity of keeping them behind bars?”
Senior Advocates C Aryama Sundaram, Siddharth Dave, and Mukul Rohatgi represented the petitioners, while Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra acted on behalf of the State.
The alleged liquor scam in Andhra Pradesh is said to be linked to changes made in the state’s liquor licensing, supply and sales system between 2019 and 2024. Investigators claim that the revised policy created space for a few selected distilleries and small or shell companies to take control of the liquor market, reducing transparency and causing heavy loss to public revenue.
According to the officials, the policy shift pushed long-established national liquor brands out of the market, while several new and lesser-known brands some of which are suspected to be connected to the accused entered the system in large numbers.
Cases Titles:
BALAJI GOVINDAPPA v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH | SLP(Crl) No. 18853/2025
PELLAKURU KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH | SLP(Crl) No. 18836/2025
K DHANUNJAYA REDDY v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
