1. Petition for anticipatory bail regarding alleged financial irregularities and fraud in liquor procurement involving public money under the Indian Penal Code and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 1523
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
The Supreme Court remitted an anticipatory bail plea to the High Court for fresh consideration after the State produced new prima facie evidence, directing the High Court to evaluate the materials and potential political vendetta according to well-settled principles of anticipatory bail.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420, 409, 120-B; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 318/4, 316/5, 61/2 - Anticipatory bail - Application for anticipatory bail rejected by High Court based on lack of direct accusations in the FIR and ongoing investigation; the High Court is to assess the merit and materials concerning the accused's involvement anew - The court cannot interfere with police discretion during initial investigations. (Paras 5, 10, 11, 18)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a sitting Member of Parliament, sought anticipatory bail concerning allegations of involvement in a major liquor scam based on a complaint of irregularities during previous governance. The High Court rejected the bail plea, citing lack of evidence against the petitioner in the FIR as well as the status of the investigation.
Findings of Court:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and remitted the bail application back for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need to examine the materials indicating involvement in alleged offences.
Issues: The main issues included the validity of apprehension for arrest, the High Court's grounds for denying bail, and whether prima facie evidence warranted a different conclusion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that the High Court should consider all relevant materials concerning the accused's involvement before making a determination on bail, underscoring that allegations should not be politically motivated.
Result: The order denying anticipatory bail was set aside and remitted to the High Court for re-evaluation.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner sought anticipatory bail based on apprehension of arrest; State contended prima facie evidence exists and the petitioner is now an accused in the FIR. (Para 4 , 11 )
3. Arrest power under Section 35 BNSS is discretionary and must be exercised with caution and circumspection as it encroaches upon personal liberty and reputation. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 )
4. When a High Court denies anticipatory bail on the ground of no apprehension of arrest, and new evidence emerges, the matter should be remitted for fresh consideration. (Para 15 , 17 , 18 )
5. Impugned order set aside and matter remitted to High Court for fresh consideration of anticipatory bail, with interim protection against arrest. (Para 18 , 22 , 24 )
6. What is the nature of the police officer's power to arrest without a warrant under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023?
The power is discretionary. A police officer may arrest a person concerned with a cognizable offence, based on reasonable complaint or credible information, but must not act in a mechanical manner. (Para 12 , 13 )
7. How should the power of arrest be exercised given its impact on individual liberty?
Because arrest is an encroachment on the liberty of the subject and affects the reputation and status of the citizen, the power must be exercised with caution and circumspection, depending on the nature of the offence and the type of accused. (Para 14 )
8. When should a matter be remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration of anticipatory bail?
If the High Court previously denied bail because the apprehension of arrest was not well-founded, but the State subsequently presents prima facie incriminating material, the matter may be remitted for fresh consideration of the plea. (Para 15 , 17 , 18 )
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:-
"To
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 very much bigger than Delhi Liquor Scam. Hence, I request you to enquire into the matter and take action against those persons involved in the liquor scam."
3. In view of the aforesaid complaint, ultimately the First Information Report came to be registered at the CID, Police Station, referred to above.
4. The petitioner apprehended arrest in connection with the First Information Report, referred to above, mainly
