SC defers hearing till Oct 9 on Naidu\'s plea, asks AP govt to file documents

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing on Telugu Desam president N. Chandrababu Naidu’s plea to quash the FIR in the AP Skill Development scam case, to October 9. The court directed the state government to submit all the documents it filed before the AP High Court so far.

A division bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi heard the matter on Tuesday when arguments from both the parties mainly focused on applicability of Section 17-A of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to the case.

The court asked about the applicability of Sections 17-A of PC Act. It noted that the offence was committed prior to the amendment carried out to the Act, by inserting 17-A, and the FIR mentioned not only the offences under such an Act but also those that fell under IPC.

Naidu’s counsel Harish Salve argued that the AP High Court wrongly interpreted Section 17-A of the PC Act. He maintained that it was related to the acts done by a public servant in discharge of official functions and that this Section was introduced by an amendment in 2018.

The court observed that Section 17-A could not be applied to the offences committed before July 2018.

However, Harish Salve argued that it was a matter of procedure and the investigation agency must obtain prior sanction. The date of offence was irrelevant. The date of inquiry must to be taken into consideration, he said.

Salve submitted that it was the “protection” that was brought in by amending the Act. So that the protection must be provided, he said.

He asked whether the ongoing inquiry could be carried out without the Governor’s approval as per Section 17-A. Then, the court said, as per his version, the date when the investigation began was relevant.

Counsel said that it was done to prevent the abuse of process of law. He quoted those who introduced the amendment to the PC Act.

Another counsel for Naidu, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, referred to the judgement of K.M. Joseph in Yashwant Sinha and Ors versus CBI, which held that Section 17-A of PC Act, mandated prior approval for inquiry. He argued that the apex court had previously held that Section 17-A was applicable with respect to offences committed prior to the 2018 amendment to the PC Act.

Another of Naidu’s counsel Siddarth Luthra submitted that in the Yashwant Sinha case pertaining to the Rafale deal, the date of the alleged commission of offence was between 2015 and 2016, which was prior to the amended PC Act.

The court observed that it was not intending to go into the merits of the mater at this stage and it was only considering the position of the law.

Siddarth Luthra argued that his client was being roped in in FIR after FIR and this was a clear case of regime revenge.

AP government’s counsel Mukul Rohatgi argued that the question of invoking section 17-A of PC Act did not arise in this case. The 17-A came in July, 2018 while the FIR was booked in 2021 and the inquiry started prior to the insertion of the 17-A in the Act.

Then the court asked whether there were any documents to show that the inquiry started before 2018. Counsel agreed to produce them before the court.

Siddarth Luthra said, “The man is in custody. That is the difficulty and the CID is seeking police custody. After 15 days, police custody can’t be claimed.” He sought an early date for the next hearing.

The court ordered the registry to list the matter for Monday and asked the state to file the entire compilation of documents that the government had submitted before the AP High Court.

Notably, the AP High Court had dismissed Naidu’s plea for quashing the FIR in the skill development scam that took place between 2014 and 2019. Naidu was named as Accused 37 in the FIR booked in 2021. As Naidu was arrested by the AP-CID on September 9, 2023, he is in judicial custody till October 5.