The Supreme Court on Tuesday posted for January 17, 2024 former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu’s plea for anticipatory bail in the Fibernet case.

The top court asked both the TDP leader and the Andhra Pradesh government to adhere to the undertaking and refrain from making statements or speaking on the matter – Fibernet case pending before it.

Advertisement

Posting the matter for hearing on January 17 and continuing the protection from coercive action to Chandrababu Naidu, a bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M. Trivedi reminded both the sides that they have undertaken to gentlemanly refrain from speaking on the matter before the court and stick to it.

The court said that the judgment on the applicability of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in AP Skill Development case and the Fibernet case will take some more time to be completed.

The court told senior advocate Sidharth Luthra appearing for Chandrababu Naidu, “Your client should not be making statements on the matter. Whole thing is going on a gentleman agreement and both sides are required to act gentlemanly.”

On October 13, the Andhra Pradesh government had assured the top court that it will not arrest former State Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu in the Fibernet case till October 18. This undertaking was reiterated on October 17 and 20, 2023 and November 30 and stands extended today as well.

Justice Bose said that both sides should adhere to the undertaking as senior advocate Ranjit Kunar appearing for the Andhra Pradesh government told the bench that the former chief minister Naidu was making statements in respect of the case and the incarceration he had undergone.

Countering the submission by the Andhra Pradesh government, senior advocate Sidharth Luthra told the bench that the statements against Naidu were being made not only in Hyderabad but in Delhi as well and referred to a statement by the Director General of Andhra Pradesh police, describing it as shocking.

Linking the statements by both the sides to an election time exchange, Justice Bose observed that “no election is nearby” and asked both the sides to adhere to the undertaking.

Earlier, the Andhra Pradesh police has made a statement in the court that it will hold its hand and not take any coercive steps against Chandrababu Naidu till the issue whether he (Chandrababu Naidu) is shielded under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is resolved.

The court on October 17, 2023, had reserved judgment on the former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu’s plea seeking the quashing of the FIR in the alleged Andhra Pradesh Skill Development scan case on the grounds that case was initiated against him without prior sanction of the State Governor as mandated under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

This is the issue common to both the matters – Andhra Pradesh Skill Development case and the Fibernet case.

The Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act requires State Governor’s consent before the initiation of action against Naidu for the alleged irregularities committed in the Andhra Pradesh Skill Development case and the Fibernet case while he was the Chief Minister from 2014 to 2019.

Section 17A was incorporated in the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, by an amendment and the same came into force on July 26, 2018.

While Chandrababu Naidu has contended that case of alleged corruption in the Skill Development case was initiated post incorporation of Section 17A, the Andhra Pradesh government has asserted that Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, can’t parachute in the cases of alleged corruption leading to loss to the State exchequer that happened before its birth on July 26, 2018.

Chandrababu Naidu has also contended that the enforcement of the Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is retrospective and the cases registered against him are covered under Section 17A.

Chandrababu Naidu has knocked the doors to the top court contending that no criminal prosecution can be launched against him on the issues arising from the decisions he took in discharge of his official duties as Chief Minister between 2014 and 2019 without prior sanction of the Governor as provided under the Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

In the hearing of the matter on October 20, the bench had said that since the order on the applicability of Section 17A of Prevention of Corruption Act in Naidu’s plea seeking the quashing of FIR in Skill Development scam case is reserved, it would be appropriate to hear anticipatory bail plea of Naidu in Fibernet case after the verdict is delivered, since the issue is common to both the cases.

The top court is seized of the Naidu’s plea against the Andhra Pradesh High Court order refusing to grant him anticipatory bail in October.