AP skill development case: SC bench delivers split verdict on Naidu, refers matter to CJI

Naidu's petition challenged his arrest on September 8, 2023, in the 2021 FIR lodged by the Crime Investigation Department related to setting up skill development centres across the state.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court bench on Tuesday gave a split verdict on the issue of obtaining prior sanction before initiating inquiry, enquiry or investigation against public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi ordered posting the matter before the Chief Justice of India for setting up a larger bench to decide the applicability of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, brought into the statute book in 2018.

The question arose before the court on a petition filed by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu questioning his arrest and lodging of an FIR in connection with Rs 3,300 Cr scam in setting up skill development centres.

The TDP chief led by senior advocate Sidharth Luthra had contended the initiation of the enquiry and the registration of the FIR in his case are non est as both have been initiated and investigation continued without a mandatory approval under Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended on July 26, 2018.

The top court, however, rejected Naidu's plea to declare lodging of the FIR, his arrest and remand as illegal.

Pronouncing the order, Justice Bose held if any inquiry, enquiry and investigation has been initiated without previous approval of the competent authority under Section 17 A, it shall be held illegal.

In case of Naidu, Justice Bose said his order would not foreclose the opportunity to obtain permission against the leader. He said the remand order and arrest can't be held illegal.

Justice Trivedi, for her part, held that the Amendment Act, 2018 can't be used to seek mandatory approval of the authorities for the offences prior to the date of July 26, 2018 notified for application of the new provisions.

The Amendment Act, 2018 would be applied prospectively, not to offences which occured before the date of notification.The provisions can't be used to provide benefit to dishonest public servants and would not be a ground to quash the proceedings for the offences committed prior to the date, she said.Naidu challenged his arrest on September 8, 2022 in the 2021 FIR lodged by Crime Investigation Department (CID) related to setting up skill development centres across the state.The High Court had on September 22, 2022 refused to quash lodging of the FIR on December 9, 2021 and an order of his judicial remand in the case. Naidu, however, was granted regular bail in November, last year.