The Supreme Court on Friday has expressed serious concern over the manner in which a murder investigation against Andhra Pradesh YSR Congress Party MLC Anantha Babu was handled, observing that the conduct of the state police reflected “laxity, if not complicity” in probing the offence.
The case relates to the 2022 murder of a driver, allegedly linked to a sitting Member of the Legislative Council (MLC), who is the prime accused in the case registered under Sections 302, 201 and 34 IPC, along with provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The accused had secured default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC after the charge sheet was returned for want of certain FSL reports.
During the hearing, the victim’s mother alleged that the accused was an “extremely influential person” and there had been collusion in the investigation. The State submitted that a supplementary charge sheet had now been filed and further investigation had been undertaken after a change in government.
The Bench Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant,Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi, however, was unimpressed with the explanation and remarked:
“This again shows laxity, if not complicity of the State Police… exhibiting their grossest negligence in the matter of investigation of a heinous offence….This is a clear case of the nexus of Police and power. Police, investigating agencies have been hobnobbing with the accused and all attempts have been made to grant default bail under 167(2) CrPC to the appellant on a platter…”
The Court further observed that it had “no reason to doubt” after perusing the record that efforts appeared to have been made to facilitate bail for the accused. It noted that although the High Court had declined bail, default bail was granted after the charge sheet was returned on technical grounds.
Expressing dismay at the broader trend, the Court also questioned the practice of routinely granting leave in bail matters. Balancing the accused’s right to liberty with the victim’s right to a fair and expeditious trial, the Court refrained from cancelling bail but imposed strict timelines to ensure completion of the trial.
The Court has disposed of the matter with the following directions:
1. The Chief Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court shall entrust the trial to a “fairly senior judicial officer”.
2. Issue regarding framing of charges must be decided before April 18, 2026
3. After framing the charges, the evidence examination will be concluded.
4. If any further investigation is required, then let the same be done before March 31.
5. The entire trial must conclude by 30 November 2026.
6. Portfolio judge of the High Court to monitor compliance with the timeline and directions.
7. Let the trial court judge be free from other matters so that the current proceedings can be taken up on priority
8. No orders shall be passed to stay the trial.
Importantly, the Court made it clear that continuation of bail would depend strictly on the accused’s conduct: “If it is found that he has made any direct or indirect attempt to influence the witnesses… the necessary consequences must follow.”
Appearances
Senior Adv. Sidharth Luthra