Supreme Court Issues Notice On Senior Advocate's Plea To Quash FIR Alleging That He Took Rs. 7 Crore From Client To Influence Judges

The Supreme Court on Monday (December 2) issued notice in an SLP filed by senior advocate Vedula Venkataramana seeking to quash an FIR registered against him for allegedly taking Rs. 7 Crores from a client to influence high court judges for favourable outcome in a case.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih issued notice in the SLP against the judgment of the Telangana High Court and kept the matter to be listed on January 24, 2025 for further hearing.

“The allegations levelled against the Petitioner are grave. The allegation that money was obtained to bribe the judges of this Court casts a serious doubt on the independence of judiciary and implies that justice is up for sale. Such serious allegations need to be investigated”, the Telangana High Court had said.

The FIR, lodged by the Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, accuses him of cheating, criminal intimidation, and caste-based abuses under Sections 406, 420, 504, and 506 of the IPC and Sections 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The complaint, which forms the basis of the FIR, alleges that in 2005, Venkataramana was engaged as legal counsel by the complainant, a member of the Scheduled Caste community, and others in connection with a land dispute. The complainant and others entrusted the petitioner with case documents and alleged that he demanded Rs. 30 lakh as legal fees, which they paid. Subsequently, Venkataramana allegedly assured them of a strong case and a favourable outcome.

The complainant further alleged that, after receiving the initial fee, the petitioner demanded an additional Rs. 7 crore in cash, claiming it was required to bribe High Court judges to secure a favourable judgment. The money was allegedly paid in instalments.

However, it was later discovered that Venkataramana had allegedly colluded with the opposing party, receiving Rs. 25 crore from them. The complainant claimed that despite repeated visits to the petitioner's office and demands for a refund, he neither returned the full amount nor represented the case properly. Vedula is also accused of hurling caste-based slurs and issuing life threats when the complainant sought the return of Rs. 6 crores, which remained unpaid.

Venkataramana filed a petition before the Telangana High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the FIR on the grounds that it was based on vague and baseless allegations. He argued that the case was of a civil nature and lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate claims of payments made by the complainant.

He also relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 2014 SC 187) to assert that no preliminary inquiry had been conducted before the registration of the FIR, as required under law. The Telangana High Court dismissed the petition, observing that the allegations warranted investigation and could not be quashed at this stage. Thus, he approached the Supreme Court.

In his SLP before the Supreme Court, Venkataramana has argued that the FIR lacked prima facie substance and contained only bare allegations without proof, and no charge sheet had been filed since the FIR's registration.

Senior Advocate Niranjan Reddy along with Advocates Mandeep Kalra and Anushna Satapathy represent the petitioner.

Case no. – SLP (Crl.) Dy. No. 49000 of 2024

Case Title – Vedula Venkataraman v. State of Telangana & Ors.