Andhra Pradesh Government Moves Supreme Court Against Grant Of Anticipatory Bail To Chandrababu Naidu In IRR Alignment Corruption Case

The Andhra Pradesh government has preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, challenging the State's High Court order granting anticipatory bail to former Chief Minister and Telegu Desam Party (TDP) President N Chandrababu Naidu in alleged Inner Ring Road (IRR) alignment scam.

The matter is listed for consideration before the Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta on January 29.

Naidu, accused of corrupt practices in creation of the Master Plan for AP's capital Amaravati and the alignment of an IRR (to benefit entities and persons associated to him) was granted anticipatory bail by the Andhra Pradesh High Court earlier this month on January 10.

The subject case against Naidu, amongst other government officials, was registered under Sections 120(8), 420, 34, 35, 36, 37, 166, 167 and 217 of IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on May 9, 2022 pursuant to a report lodged by Mangalagiri MLA Alla Rama Krishna Reddy as well as a preliminary enquiry report. The accusations related to years 2014-2019, when Naidu was in power.

It was alleged that while selecting agencies for designing Master Plan for Amaravati, IRR alignment and Seed Capital, Naidu and others abused their official positions to favor certain entities in furtherance of a quid pro quo arrangement and caused loss to the public exchequer.

In Naidu's plea for anticipatory bail, the High Court observed that the State was unable to show any misappropriation of funds for the personal benefit of Naidu. It was opined that grant of anticipatory bail would not impede investigation, as the case primarily focused on documentary evidence, and relevant documents were in the custody of the State.

Considering that the de facto complainant initiated criminal process after a lapse of 3 years (allegedly due to political vendetta), that the investigating agency did not require Naidu's custodial interrogation since registration of the case (May, 2022) till September, 2023, and the fact that Naidu was not a flight risk, the High Court granted anticipatory bail.

"Considering the nature of the accusation made against the Petitioner, this Court finds that the custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is not required to conduct further investigation."

Challenging the same, the State has approached the Supreme Court, asserting that the High Court delved deep into the facts of the case, conducting a mini trial at anticipatory bail stage, and returned findings that are factually incorrect.

The plea says that Naidu, alongwith former AP Minister for Municipal Administration and Urban Develpoment, set up an elaborate scheme under which contracts inter-alia for preparation of Master Plan for Amaravati (including the IRR) were awarded to a foreign private entity on a nomination basis, "fraudulently making it appear that it was based on a Government-to-Government memorandum of understanding". 

Calling Naidu the "primary architect of the entire scam", it further states that alignment of the IRR was manipulated in such a way that certain close associates of Naidu received windfall pecuniary gains, on quid pro quo basis, and Naidu was the ultimate beneficiary.

The anticipatory bail is further being challenged on the ground that Naidu is trying to derail the investigation. It is also the State's case that delay in taking custody of Naidu cannot be held against it, as the alleged "scam" was of a complicated nature involving large amount of documentary and oral material, and the CID only proceeded to take steps for custody once Naidu's role had been investigated.

Notably, Naidu is facing charges in 3 other alleged “scams” i.e the FiberNet scam, the Skill Development scam and the Liquor scam (illegal licensing of liquor companies). He is also an accused in the Angallu 307 case, in connection with which he was granted anticipatory bail in October last year.

The Supreme Court recently delivered a split verdict on Naidu's plea for quashing the FIR in the Skill Development case, the issue being centred upon applicability of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Case Title: The State of Andhra Pradesh v. Nara Chandrababu Naidu, SLP(Crl) No.978/2024