Supreme Court declines immediate relief to TDP's Chandrababu Naidu, to hear plea on October 3
The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to consider a plea by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu against police custody remand in a case related to alleged scam in setting up skill development centres.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud said this court will not restrain the trial judge from dealing with the application seeking police custody of Chandrababu Naidu.
The top court, however, agreed to consider his plea for quashing of the FIR on October 3.
The swift development came after Justice S V N Bhatti sitting in a separate bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna recused to hear the matter.
Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra then mentioned Naidu's plea before the bench headed by the CJI.
He said on September 8, this man has been picked up illegally and he has been in custody since then.
The counsel said police custody was granted for two days and now the state wants police custody for 15 days, and they are roping him in FIR after FIR.
Luthra claimed that this was happening only because the election is coming up.
Upon this, the bench asked the counsel, “what do you want today?”
Luthra said his client cannot be kept in custody and asked the court to see 17A of Prevention of Corruption Act.
He said that no police station can take any action against a public servant acting in discharge of his duties without permission from competent authority.
The CJI said the matter will be listed for hearing before a bench on October 3.
Luthra said the court may consider one thing, the state government is pressing for police custody and let them not press for the police custody.
Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, representing the Andhra Pradesh government, said let the special judge who is a district judge decide this.
The bench said it would not restrain the trial court from considering the plea for further police remand and fixed Naidu's petition for hearing on October 3.
Naidu has approached the Supreme Court on Saturday against the High Court's September 22 order refusing to quash an FIR lodged on December 9, 2021 and order of his judicial remand in a case related to setting up skill development centres.
His petition contended both the initiation of the enquiry and the registration of the FIR is non est as both have been initiated and investigation continue till date without a mandatory approval under Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended on July 26, 2018.
He claimed the action against him was an attempt by the state government to crush the opposition.