Vundavalli Files PIL Seeking CBI Probe Against Naidu!

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has admitted yet another Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into cases involving Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu and others.

The PIL was filed by journalist Balagangadhar Tilak and former MP Vundavalli Arun Kumar, seeking the transfer of the Skill Development Corporation case and other cases involving Chandrababu Naidu to the CBI.

After hearing arguments from both sides, the High Court bench headed by Chief Justice Lisa Gill directed the lawyers representing the Crime Investigation Department (CID) to submit comprehensive details of the cases in a tabular format. The court subsequently adjourned the matter until next Tuesday.

The cases concern allegations relating to the transfer of assigned lands belonging to members of SC/ST communities, irregularities in the award of an optical fibre network tender, the establishment of skill development centres, land acquisition for the Inner Ring Road, excise policy decisions, and the framing and implementation of the free sand policy.

Senior counsel Ranjith, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the complainants in these cases were government officials and that, with Chandrababu Naidu in power, they had not come forward to challenge the closure reports by filing protest petitions.

He submitted that this left the petitioners with no option but to seek the court’s intervention to ensure that the cases received independent scrutiny.

According to the case-status chart filed in the matter, closure reports have been filed and accepted in the cases, while related proceedings seeking copies of reports or challenging closures remain pending.

The chart also records a protest petition filed by a complainant in one assigned-land case, alleging pressure from CID-SIT officials to provide a no-objection certificate for the closure of the case.

During the hearing, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared on behalf of the state government and strongly opposed the demand for a CBI investigation.

Rohatgi argued that the petitioners were seeking a CBI investigation with the intention of tarnishing the reputation of the Chief Minister and the state government.

He contended that the PIL had been filed without even basic supporting evidence and described it as an attempt to revive cases that had already been investigated and closed by the competent court.

Referring to the affidavits filed by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), he submitted that both agencies had stated that the cases were not fit for investigation by them.

He further informed the High Court that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) and the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had found insufficient evidence in the relevant cases and submitted final reports before the ACB court in Vijayawada.

After examining the reports, the ACB court had accepted the findings and ordered the closure of the cases, he submitted.

Rohatgi urged the High Court to declare the PIL infructuous and dismiss it with costs, arguing that there was no justification for ordering another investigation into matters that had already been examined by the investigating agencies and the court.

The state government’s counsel also pointed out that journalist Balagangadhar Tilak was not the complainant in any of the seven cases registered against Chandrababu Naidu and others.

He informed the court that the ACB court had closed all seven cases after the SIT submitted final reports stating that sufficient evidence was not available to proceed further.

According to Rohatgi, only one of the cases had been challenged through a revision petition before the High Court. The revision petition in that case was filed by Alla Ramakrishna Reddy, who was the complainant. He further submitted that the other complainants had not challenged the closure of the cases.

The government maintained that the investigating agencies had followed the prescribed procedure and that the ACB court had issued closure orders after considering the final reports.

After hearing the submissions, the High Court asked the CID lawyers to furnish complete details of the cases in a tabular format.

The court’s direction is expected to help it examine the status of each case, the findings of the investigating agencies, the final reports submitted before the ACB court and the subsequent orders passed by the court.