On May 16, the Supreme Court refused anticipatory bail to P Krishna Mohan Reddy and K Dhananjaya, accused in the multi-crore Andhra Pradesh liquor scam. The Court noted that the investigation is at a critical stage, and granting bail could affect the state’s ongoing probe.
Both accused served as public officials in the office of former Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy during the YSR Congress Party regime. Krishna Mohan Reddy was a secretary, while K Dhananjaya was an Officer on Special Duty (OSD).
Read Also:- Supreme Court to Hear Plea on NEET PG Marks Normalisation, Transparency Issues on May 20
The bench, consisting of Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, heard arguments from senior advocates representing both sides. Advocates for the accused claimed political bias in the investigation after the government changed and emphasized their clients' full cooperation. However, the State argued that the accused conspired to restrict liquor distribution to a select group, harming competition. Notably, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) had previously investigated this matter but closed the case.
Senior advocates for the State strongly opposed anticipatory bail, saying it could prejudice their inquiry. They stressed the case involves alleged misappropriation of over ₹3,000 crores and that custodial interrogation may be necessary. After hearing all sides, the Court declined to grant bail.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Rejects Plea for Action Against BJP Minister Vijay Shah Over Remarks on Colonel Sofiya
The Court also addressed the separate case of Balaji Govindappa, another accused who is currently in judicial custody. Justice Pardiwala questioned the State’s attempt to seek police remand after judicial custody was granted, calling it “absurd” and “impossible.”
"How can you send him to police custody and then bring him back to police custody? Impossible sir. Absurd! Is this what is going on in the State? Absurd!" — Justice JB Pardiwala
The Court made it clear that any further bail applications will be considered by the concerned courts on their merits and urged the investigating agency to conduct a fair, impartial probe without any undue pressure on witnesses or accused persons.
"The State shall not adopt any third-degree methods or coerce any witnesses or accused. Any such acts will be taken seriously by courts." — Supreme Court
Read Also:- Justice Behind Bars: Supreme Court Legal Services Committee's Landmark Initiative Empowers Thousands of Inmates
While acknowledging claims of political bias, the Court held that such allegations alone are insufficient to grant anticipatory bail if the investigation shows a prima facie case. The High Court had already examined the matter and refused bail based on disclosure statements admissible during trial.
Case Details: P KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH|SLP(Crl) No. 7532/2025
