Ex-A.P CM N Chandrababu Naidu Arrested Over Multi-Crore Scam Case in A.P
(Judicial Quest News Network)
Former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister and Telugu Desam Party (TDP) Chief N. Chandrababu Naidu was arrested by the Andhra Pradesh Criminal Investigation Department (CID) from Nandyal District in the early hours on Saturday morning, 9, September, for his alleged involvement in the multi-crore “Skill Development Scam”.
Additional Director General of Police (CID), N Sanjay, who announced the arrest, told the press persons that he played a key role in siphoning off approximately 371 crore belonging to (APSSDC).
A team of CID official cordoned off his place of stay and then took him in custody amid stiff resistance.
He was questioned for nearly 10 hours before being produced before the court. Seeking his judicial custody, CID alleged that Naidu and the Telugu Desam Party were the “end beneficiaries” of the misappropriated funds.
Mr. Naidu’s arrest invoked strong resentment in opposition parties, and TDP cadre picked up confrontation with the police at several places in the State.
The Scandal is related to the formation of Andhra Pradesh State Skill Development Corporation (APSSDC), which, in 2014, aimed at training unemployed youth and fostering ties with educational institutes near industries like kea in the Ananthapur District.
Naidu was arrested under the relevant IPC sections, including sections 120B, (Criminal Conspiracy), 420, (Cheating and Dishonesty including delivery of Property), and 4656 (Forgery), according to the notice.
Naidu’s lawyers in his produce petition claimed that the Petitioner (Naidu) was detained at 11p.m. on 08.09.2023, though to cover up his illegal detention of about 7 hours, his formal arrest is shown at 6 am on 09.09.2023 at Nandyala. His bus was surrounded and he was not allowed to move and hence detained illegally.
CID has also invoked the Prevention of Corruption Act against him.
During the Naidu’s tenure as Chief Minister of A.P. The State government had entered into an MoU with German engineering Giant Siemens. It is alleged that a whooping 371 crore was disbursed in five instalments with in three months, even though Siemens had invested any funds into the project.
The MoU stipulated that the Andhra Pradesh government was responsible for contributing 10 per cent of the total project cost of Rs. 3,356 crore.
It was also alleged that no note files were signed by the then-principal finance secretary and the then Chief Secretary, raising questions about transparency. Reports also suggest attempts were made to destroy critical documentary evidences linked to the scandal.
The said project was supposed to be executed by APSSDC in partnership with a consortium comprising Siemens, industry Software India Ltd and Design Tech System Pvt. Ltd. Siemens was tasked with establishing six centres of excellence.
The Allegations levelled against him suggest that Naidu ordered the immediate release of funds, despite objections from finance department officials. Key government officials, including finance principal secretary, Chief Secretary, were implicated in facilitating fund release.
Mr. Naidu’s wife Bhuvaneshwari and Son and former Minister Nara Lokesh, who suspended his Yuva Galam Padyatra at Razole in Konaseema district due to the contingency, reached the CID office near Vijaywada in the evening to meet Mr. Naidu. But they were made to wait while the CID carried out the formalities to produce him in the court.
In his remand report Naidu submits that the FIR was registered for the alleged offences under section 166, 167, 418, 465, 468, 471, 409, 201, 109 R/w. 120-B IPC and under Section 13(2), R/w. 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. All the offences except Section 409 IPC and Section 13(2), R/w. 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, are less than seven years.
When section 418 IPC is slashed against the petitioner, section 409 IPC and 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act do not attract the ingredients. Both the sections just oppose.
There are no allegations against the petitioner constituting the offence under Section 409 IPC and Section 13(2), R/w. 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. In the arrest intimation Section 34 and 37 IPC were added. There is no allegations or material to substantiate either under Section 34 IPC or under Section 37 IPC as against the petitioner herein. The issue of jurisdiction of ACB would be raised at the time of hearing.The produce petition if filed by Advocates Mr.Ginjupalli Subba Rao Mrs.S.Pranathi Mr.M.Lakshmi Narayana Mr.G.Basaveswara Rao.
Senior Advocate of Supreme Court Mr. Siddharth Luthra appeared for arguments.
