In a pivotal development in Indian politics and law, the Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for January 19, 2023, to deliberate on the Andhra Pradesh government’s challenge to the bail granted to N. Chandrababu Naidu, the chief of the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh. This case, rooted in the alleged skill development scam, underscores the intricate interplay between the judiciary and political dynamics in India.
Also read- Supreme Court Rules Non-Signatories Can Be Bound By Arbitration Agreements (lawchakra.in)
The bench, comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, decided to adjourn the hearing following a request from Naidu’s counsel. Senior Advocate Harish Salve, representing Naidu, sought additional time to prepare a comprehensive response to the state government’s petition. Salve articulated,
“We’ll put in a reply. Your Lordships may fix this sometime in January. If the judgment comes out, then fine, otherwise we’ll go on with this matter.”
This statement referred to an earlier petition filed by Naidu, challenging the FIR against him in the skill development case, where the judgment was reserved by the Court on October 17.
Naidu, 73, is embroiled in a controversy involving the alleged misappropriation of funds from the Andhra Pradesh Skill Development Corporation. The state crime investigation department claims to have found prima facie evidence of Naidu’s key role in the embezzlement of around Rs 371 crore through fictitious companies during TDP’s rule between 2014 and 2019. He is the 37th accused in a 2021 FIR related to this multi-crore scam.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in an earlier ruling, had dismissed Naidu’s plea for quashing the FIR. Naidu had argued that the CID failed to obtain prior approval from the governor, as required by Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, Justice K Sreenivas Reddy of the High Court ruled that prior sanction was unnecessary for the investigation, as the use of public funds for personal gain did not constitute an act in the discharge of official duties. The court emphasized the importance of not hindering the investigation of serious economic offences, especially at an early stage.
Subsequently, the High Court granted regular bail to Naidu. Justice T Mallikarjun Rao, while granting bail, stated that based on the available material, it couldn’t be definitively concluded that the misappropriated amounts were diverted to TDP’s bank accounts. The court also noted that Naidu couldn’t be held responsible for the discrepancies highlighted in the Forensic Audit report, which indicated that out of Rs 371 crores, at least Rs 241 crores were misappropriated by SISW and Design Tech, then diverted to various shell companies.
Also read- Supreme Court Deliberates On Section 6A Of Citizenship Act (Day-2) (lawchakra.in)
The Supreme Court, while relaxing the bail condition, allowed Naidu to participate in public rallies and meetings until December 8. However, it maintained that other bail conditions, including refraining from making public statements or speaking to the media about the case, would remain in force.
The Andhra Pradesh government, in its appeal to the Supreme Court, has portrayed Naidu as an “influential person” and expressed concerns about his potential to affect the case’s outcome. The government highlighted that two of Naidu’s key associates, including a government servant, have already fled the country.
As the Supreme Court gears up to hear this case in January, the decision is anticipated to have significant repercussions on the legal and political landscapes in India. The case not only exemplifies the complex relationship between politics and the judiciary but also reflects the ongoing challenges in addressing high-profile corruption cases in the country.
Also read-Supreme Court Demands Detailed Data On Illegal Migration In Assam (lawchakra.in)
