The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to examine an appeal filed by Andhra Pradesh on Tuesday against the grant of regular bail to former Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu by the State High Court in the skill development ‘scam’ case.
A Bench headed by Justice Bela M. Trivedi issued notice to Mr. Naidu and scheduled the case for December 8.
The top court retained the conditions of bail imposed by the High Court, including a restraint on Mr. Naidu from making public statements about the case.
However, the court refused to impede Mr. Naidu from organising and participating in public rallies and meetings.
In its appeal, the State said the High Court judgment, in a bail matter, had “delved deep into facts of the case and rendered findings that were not only factually incorrect but are also likely to prejudice the court below during the trial”.
The petition, represented by advocate Mahfooz A. Nazki, said the Supreme Court had itself deprecated the practice of lower courts going into a detailed elaboration of evidence in bail orders.
It said the bail court needed to only follow the triple test to decide whether or not to grant bail to an accused. These include whether the accused would likely abscond or influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.
The State claimed that Mr. Naidu had used his influence to “facilitate” the flight of two associates, Manoj V. Pardasany and Pendyala Srinivas, to the UAE and the U.S. immediately after the duo had received notices in relation to the investigation of the scam on September 5, 2023.
According to the State’s petition in the top court, the alleged crime relates to a project involving the Andhra Pradesh State Skill Development Corporation (APSSDC), Siemens Industry Software (India) Pvt. Ltd and DesignTech India Private Limited for the establishment of SIEMENS centres of excellence and skill development in six clusters in Andhra Pradesh.
Mr. Naidu has been accused of expedited incorporation of the APSSDC by overruling objections that it required Cabinet approval, making appointments to key positions in the APSSDC to “facilitate the scam”, entering into a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Siemens and DesignTech without any tender process and expedited release of funds for the project “before any work was done, even overruling the objections of senior officers such as the Finance Secretary”.
