SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. PARDIWALA AND R. MAHADEVAN, JJ.
P.V. Midhun Reddy @ Peddireddi Venkata Midhun Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Special Leave Petition(Crl.) No. 5218 of 2025
Decided on : 13-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. irregularities in liquor procurement and political involvement (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. denial of anticipatory bail due to lack of accusations (Para 4 , 5 , 8 , 11 , 15 , 18) |
| 3. caution in the exercise of arrest powers by police (Para 6 , 7 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. remission to the high court for fresh consideration (Para 17 , 22 , 24) |
| 5. disposition of special leave petition (Para 25 , 26) |
ORDER :
1. The petitioner before us is a sitting Member of Parliament. He belongs to a regional political party of the State of Andhra Pradesh by name YSRCP. He has been denied anticipatory bail by the High Court in connection with Crime No.21 of 2024 registered at the C.I.D., Police Station, Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, for the offence punishable under Sections 420 , 409 & 120-B respectively of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (now Sections 318 /4, 316/5 & 61/2 respectively of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) (for short the, " BNS ", 2023).
2. It appears from the materials on record that one individual by name Mr. Y. Venkateswar Rao Srinivas, a resident of Vijaywada lodged a complaint in writing addressed to the Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (Excise) Department, Amarawati, Andhra Pradesh dated 26-8-2024 stating as under:-
Principal Secretary to Govt, Revenue (Excise) Dept, Amaravathi, AP.
Sir
Sub: Request to enquire and take action against the irregularities happened during 2019 to 2024 In APSBCL, Andhra Pradesh - Regarding.
I wish to bring to your notice, certain irregularities that happened in APSBCL, Andhra Pradesh during the period October 2019 and March 2024 in which thousands of crores of public money was plundered by the then ruling party leaders. In fact, they pressurized some of the Excise and APSBCL: officials and got the OFS (Order for Supply) issued by violating the conditions mentioned in the Rate Contract Agreement.
The classic modus Operandi starts with killing of the existing popular brands, who do not fail in their line and who do not pay Kickbacks, by refusing to take their stock into the shops owned by APSBCL. Instead, they allowed new spurious brands of liquor and promoted liquor sales for new brands by taking huge money from the Distilleries and Suppliers and disallowed premium and old brands into AP. This famous modus Operandi is called Brand Killing and New, Brand Promotion. Thus, every month, they used to sell around 30 Lakh cases of liquor for which the then ruling party leaders used to get 150 Rs to 250 Rs per case. Thus, for every month, they amassed about 70-80 crores per month.
As per Rate contract agreement, APSBCL is supposed to buy liquor from distilleries by giving OFS as per formula. The formula is that they shall buy stocks worth (110% of average sales during the preceding two months minus available stock on hand minus OFS to be executed). But, on the instructions of the then ruling party leaders, APSBCL refused to take stocks from some popular brands like Mc Dowells Whisky, Mc Dowells Brandy, Honey Bee Brandy, Bag Piper Whisky, Royal Stag, Imperial Blue etc for not paying kickbacks.
On the contrary, they started promoting new spurious liquor brands like Ocean Blue whisky, Daru House Brandy, Supreme Blend Whisky, Brilliant Blend Whisky, 9 Sea Horse Whisky, Andhra Gold Whisky, Southern Spice Whisky, Good Friend Whisky etc and started giving OFSs for lakhs of liquor cases violating the formula that they shall not procure 10000 cases at the first Instance. While fixing the basic price of new brand, the then ruling party leaders used to Influence APSBCL. Further, the then ruling party leaders got partnership in SPY distilleries and influenced to increase basic price of the brands namely Galaxy Brandy, Champion Whisky, HD Whisky and issued more number of Purchase Orders (POS) violating the conditions mentioned in Rate Contract.
Further, the then ruling party leaders established a hawala kind of secret money transection system by using some of his henchmen. This scam is unheard and is
Anticipatory bail petition – Court may either grant or decline bail – Court cannot ask why accused was not arrested.
Anticipatory bail cannot be granted based on vague allegations; the applicant must demonstrate a reasonable belief of imminent arrest linked to specific offenses.
Anticipatory bail should be denied when the accused has a history of similar offenses, as it poses a risk of tampering with evidence and undermines the investigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C in a case registered under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, based on the petitio....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.