Today, On 23rd February, The Supreme Court of India said during a plea on the Tirumala laddu adulteration row that the Andhra Pradesh cannot run an administrative inquiry parallel to its Court-ordered investigation. Reaffirming that action cannot overlap or interfere with investigation.
The Supreme Court of India, led by a Bench of Chief Justice of India and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, heard a plea filed by Subramanian Swamy regarding the controversy linked to alleged adulteration in Tirumala laddus distributed by the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams.
During the hearing, Subramanian Swamy argued that the Andhra Pradesh government’s latest decision weakens the authority of the Special Investigation Team that was earlier constituted by the Supreme Court of India to investigate the alleged irregularities in the making of the laddus.
He said this interferes with the probe that was ordered by the Court itself.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, representing the respondent, opposed the plea and submitted that the petition is wholly mala fide and intended only to block administrative steps taken by the State.
He said,
“The plea relies largely on newspaper reports and therefore has no real substance.”
The Chief Justice of India observed that,
“The writ petition under Article 32 seeks to restrain the State of Andhra Pradesh from interfering with the investigation earlier directed by the Supreme Court of India.”
The entire controversy relates to claims that the ghee used in the famous Tirupati prasadam laddus was adulterated, which has triggered serious concerns about the purity and sanctity of the prasad offered to devotees.
According to case records, an FIR was registered on 25 September 2024, and later the Supreme Court, in its October 2024 order, entrusted the probe to a Special Investigation Team.
The SIT has now completed the investigation and a chargesheet has also been filed. The Chief Justice noted that the matter is still sub judice. At the same time, the Andhra Pradesh government has started an administrative inquiry to find out what lapses occurred, who was responsible, and what consequences should follow.
The Court said clearly that the State’s administrative inquiry cannot overlap with the investigation already directed by the Supreme Court of India.
It also found that the present writ petition filed by Subramanian Swamy lacks a foundational basis.
However, the Court clarified that both processes may continue forward, but strictly as per the law.
Case Title: SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Versus THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. W.P.(C) No. 234/2026 PIL-W
Read Live Coverage