E-Paper
SC pulls up Andhra police for ‘nexus’ with murder accused MLC
The Supreme Court criticized Andhra Pradesh police for delays in a murder trial involving a YSR Congress MLC, highlighting a "nexus" with the accused
The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Andhra Pradesh police for “hobnobbing” with a sitting member of legislative council (MLC) of the YSR Congress Party, who is an accused in a 2022 murder, whose trial has not moved to the stage of framing of charge in three years even as the politician is out on interim bail.
Striking a balance between fair trial and personal liberty, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said, “This is a clear case of nexus of power and police,” as it noticed the “laxity” and “complicity” of the state police to conclude trial in a case for the past four years.
In a stinging criticism of the handling of the case, the bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi said, “Police has been hobnobbing with the accused to grant him default bail on a platter…There is a clear case of nexus of power and police.” Default bail is granted to an accused under section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) when the police fail to complete investigation within the stipulated period of 90 days in case of a heinous offence.
The court was hearing an appeal filed by sitting MLC Anantha Satya Udaya Bhaskara Rao alias Anantha Babu who is accused of murdering his former driver Veedhi Subrahmanyam in May 2022 over alleged non-payment of loan. In December 2022, the top court granted him interim bail after Andhra Pradesh high court denied him default bail.
With the family of the victim alleging that even the framing of charges has not taken place in the case, the bench ordered the police to complete any further investigation by March 31 and requested chief justice of the Andhra Pradesh HC to assign the case to a senior judicial officer who may frame charges by April 18 and complete the trial by November 30 this year.
The MLC is facing charges for murder, causing disappearance of evidence among other offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) along with separate provisions under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The bench said, “He (MLC) is enjoying the benefit of interim bail for the last over three years. Now the police has filed a supplementary chargesheet. This again shows laxity, if not complicity, of the police with the accused exhibiting grossest negligence in a heinous offence.”
The state represented by senior advocate Siddharth Luthra informed the court that after the change of regime in the state in 2024, it was at the instance of police that a re-investigation was undertaken and a supplementary charge sheet came to be filed. Luthra said that this decision was taken as several gaps were noticed in the investigation earlier undertaken by the police when the YSR Congress Party was in power in the state.
The court remarked, “What action have you taken? Has any show cause notice been issued? Have you initiated any disciplinary action?” As Luthra said that the same was not done, the bench observed, “What authority does the DGP have to continue if he cannot control the Superintendent of Police or the investigating officer.”
To strike a balance between personal liberty of the MLC and fair trial, the court did not disturb the bail order but said, “The continuation of bail shall depend upon his conduct during pendency of the proceedings. If it is found that he has tampered with evidence or influenced witnesses, consequences will follow.”
The court requested the HC not to pass any order staying the trial asking any aggrieved party to directly approach the top court. It further requested that the judicial officer hearing the case is largely spared of other matters to ensure the matter is heard at least once every week.
