Chandrababu Naidu's Plea To Quash FIR : Live Updates From Supreme Court

Salve : 17A is introduced exactly to prevent cases like these, where a person is politically targeted after the change of regime.

Salve refers to the remand order and says it records that the case was based on a preliminary enquiry in 2021

Salve : It is a sorry attempt by the State to present a different picture on facts. On the question of interpretation of law, we may be right, we may be wrong. But blowing smoke on facts does not help.

Salve is taking the bench through the index of documents.

Correction : Justice Bose was referring to the letter dated 5 June 2018 and not 5 July 2018.

Salve : The High Court says, in para 15, admittedly the accusations relate to 2015-16. So the HC says you will be governed by the law which was prevailing then. So the HC held that the date of enquiry is irrelevant and that is why the HC did not consider the document.

Justice Bose : We are examining two things. One, whether the 5 July 2018 document was before the High Court and you had the opportunity to deal with it and if you had no such opportunity...

Salve : In any case, sending back will not help me as the HC judge says date of offence matters for Sect 17A. So the judgment does not turn on the document. I was showing the document because the other side is now arguing that the enquiry started before 2018.

Salve : Argument of State was that 17A, inserted in July 2018, will not apply to offences committed prior to it.

Salve says that the number of the Preliminary Enquiry done in 2021 matches with the reference in FIR. Salve is seeking to establish that the enquiry commenced only in 2021 and hence Section 17A of the PC Act is applicable to the case.

Salve : Please see the complaint dated 7 Sept, 2021. It was against Siemens, Design Tech etc alleging they swindled public money....

(reads out the complaint)..