An Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) court in Vijayawada in Andhra Pradesh on Sunday, 10 September, remanded Telugu Desam Party chief and former state chief minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu for 14 days.
The court was hearing a petition for the dismissal of Naidu’s remand report, which the CID filed on Sunday in connection with Naidu’s arrest.
Arguments for Naidu
When the arguments began in the morning, Supreme Court lawyer Siddhartha Luthra argued on behalf of Chandrababu Naidu, seeking the dismissal of the remand report which sought 15 days of remand for Naidu.
He contended that the case had lost its steam long ago as the case registered in 2021 was heard by the high court and the verdict remains reserved.
He argued that all the accused in the case had obtained bail, but the CID, with a mala fide intention, had reopened the case only to implicate Chandrababu Naidu.The case against him was politically motivated, he contended.
He took objection to the CID invoking Section 409 (criminal breach of trust by a public servant, banker, merchant, or agent) of the IPC against Naidu without producing any incontrovertible evidence against him.
He said that though the CID had ample opportunity to produce Naidu before a magistrate in Nandyal, it chose to bring him to Vijayawada.The CID officials restricted his movement since 11 pm on Friday, contrary to its claim that they had arrested him at 6 am, argued Naidu’s counsel.
He said that the CID officials should submit to the court their call data for the last 48 hours.
He also objected to the CID arresting Naidu without obtaining permission from the Governor, though it was mandatory as he was the chief minister of the state when the alleged offence took place.
Chandrababu Naidu, who argued for himself after obtaining permission from the court, contended that he had nothing to do with the scam, and that the budget approved by the Assembly could not be challenged by filing criminal charges.
He said that the state Cabinet had cleared the setting up of the Andhra Pradesh State Skill Development Corporation (APSSDC).
He also said that as of 9 December, 2021, his name was not in the FIR.In the remand report filed then, the CID did not frame any charges against him, he noted, arguing that his arrest on Saturday was illegal and politically motivated.
He also argued that as he was the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh when the alleged offence had taken place, the person who could remove him from office was the Governor.
Thus, the prosecution had to obtain prior sanction of the Governor even to initiate an inquiry in the case, which it did not, he said.
He pleaded with the court to reject the remand of the petitioner, which he said was in violation of the statutory provisions under Section 17-A of the IPC and without any prima facie accusation.
What the CID said
The CID, in its remand report, sought 15 days of judicial custody of Naidu under Section 167 of CrPC.Though the former chief minister was listed as Accused No 1 in the FIR, in the remand report he was shown as Accused No 37, or A-37, which indicated that the CID would file another memo about the change of status.
The CID said that the arrest became necessary as the issue involved the misappropriation of at least ₹279 crore in a government project (development of centres of excellence in a tie-up with the private firm Siemens).
The investigation agency said that after the TDP chief reached the office of the SIT at Kunchanapalli near Tadepalli in the Guntur district on Saturday, Naidu was questioned about his role in the scam in the presence of two mediators.
He was given breaks as he requested and was allowed to consult his legal counsel and meet members of his family, it added.He was questioned based on the note files which formed part of the evidence.
According to the agency, Naidu was non-cooperative and gave vague replies.
The CID said that APSSDC funds were diverted by the company DesignTech to various shell and inoperative companies based in Singapore and London, and an investigation was in progress.
The investigation agency said that the offence committed was punishable with more than 10 years of imprisonment.
It said that inquiries revealed that a system existed for generating bribes for Naidu from various work contracts issued by the state government between 2017 and 2019.
The modus operandi for the generation of cash was through bogus invoices for procurement of works, goods, and services by subcontractors of the main contractors executing the work, it added.
The cash was then handed over to persons and at the places as directed by Naidu by the representatives of the companies executing the works.
While a part of the ₹371 crore was spent for the creation of six centres of excellence clusters, which itself is a departure from GO No 4, the rest of the money was routed and re-routed through shell companies, said the CID.
The investigation revealed that Chandrababu Naidu and the TDP were the end beneficiaries of the misappropriated money, the investigators contended.
Overriding the then finance secretary K Sunitha, the government released ₹371 crore to DesignTech, which allegedly diverted ₹279 crore to several shell companies, and from there the money went back to Naidu and the TDP, the agency said.
