FiberNet 'Scam' | Supreme Court Asks Chandrababu Naidu & State To Avoid Public Comments On Case

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (December 12) directed former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu's anticipatory bail plea in the FiberNet scam to be listed on January 17 at 3 PM. On the last occasion, the hearing had been adjourned by the court to await the decision in the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) supremo's quash petition in the skill development case. A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi was hearing Naidu's special leave petition against an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court refusing to grant him anticipatory bail in the FiberNet scam case in October. The same bench had reserved judgment in the skill development case on October 17.During the brief courtroom exchange today, Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing on behalf of the State of Andhra Pradesh accused Naidu of continuing to make 'political statements' about the cases against him and his incarceration, despite the court's order in another special leave petition (relating to skill development scam case) enjoining him from publicly commenting on the pending case. Last month, while hearing the state government's plea challenging an order passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court granting regular bail to the Telugu Desam Party president in the skill development scam case, the top court had directed the continuation of a bail condition enjoining Naidu from speaking about sub judice matters arising out of the case in the public domain. However, the court refused to impose the other bail condition prohibiting him from organising or participating in political rallies or meetings. These conditions were initially imposed by the high court in an interim order, but later not extended when Naidu was granted regular bail.On Kumar's request, Justice Bose orally asked Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra to ensure that Naidu, his client, did not make any statement in the public domain about the pendency of his plea in the FiberNet scam case as well. Luthra, in turn, pointed to alleged remarks made by Andhra Pradesh's additional advocate general about the criminal cases against Naidu. "There's a lot to be said about the way the State is conducting itself...My learned friend's AAG, I'm sorry to say this, has not only made statements about the case, but he has also held press conferences here in Delhi and in Hyderabad. He has said things about me as well, which I have laughed off."As tensions started rising in court, Justice Bose interjected to tell both senior counsels to ask their respective clients to maintain public silence over the pending cases, even in the FiberNet scam case. The judge said, "The whole thing is going on a gentleman's agreement. Both sides are being represented by gentlemen so..."With that pithy comment, Justice Bose adjourned the hearing until January.BackgroundNara Chandrababu Naidu, the Telugu Desam Party president and former chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, has been accused of playing a 'key role' in the AP FiberNet scam that happened during the TDP term in the state. The AP crime investigation department (CID) has accused him of exerting pressure on officials to favour a certain company that was awarded the FiberNet contract, despite its alleged lack of necessary qualifications. Naidu was recently implicated in this case that was registered back in 2021. After his arrest in the skill development scam case, the prosecution moved a petition under Section 263 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the issuance of a transit warrant. Although the State has sought to explain the delay in Naidu's inclusion as an accused on grounds of the challenges faced in examining crucial witnesses and suspected conspirators thrcough digital means, the former chief minister has cried foul, calling this a politically motivated decision.Last month, Naidu's plea for anticipatory bail in this case was dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The court, while addressing Naidu's concerns about the timing of his inclusion as an accused in the case, emphasised that the investigative process in such complex offenses naturally takes time. Justice K. Suresh Reddy maintained that the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly the testimony of a key witness, did not support the claim of motivated timing and underscored the necessity of considering larger public interest when deciding matters of bail, rather than merely focusing on the prescribed penalties for the offence. Justice Reddy while dismissing the anticipatory bail application held -"In the circumstances and since the larger interest of the public or State also needs to be looked at in terms of the gravity, and not only in terms of the penalty prescribed for the offence, and having regard to the gravity of the offence which pertains to the allegation of causing of pecuniary advantage of about Rs.114.53 crores to A3 and consequential loss to the state exchequer, with the alleged connivance of the petitioner, this court is of the opinion that grant of anticipatory bail to the ...

FiberNet 'Scam' | Supreme Court Asks Chandrababu Naidu & State To Avoid Public Comments On Case

Awstika Das

Tags