The Supreme Court on Monday dealt a setback to Raj Kesireddy, the prime accused in the alleged Andhra Pradesh liquor scam that took place during the previous YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) government, stating that it would not intervene in his bail plea at this stage.
Kesireddy had approached the apex court after the Andhra Pradesh high court refused to grant him regular bail in connection with the case.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Justice Suryakant took up the matter for hearing.
As soon as senior counsel Nagamuthu, appearing for Kesireddy, began his submissions, the bench remarked that there was no ground for the Supreme Court to intervene in the petition.
The bench observed that Kesireddy was alleged to be the key conspirator in the case and questioned how regular bail could be granted under such circumstances.
It noted that the high court had refused bail only after examining all aspects of the case in detail.
During the course of the hearing, the bench made several strong observations.
It stated that Kesireddy appeared to be the central figure in the alleged conspiracy linked to the liquor scam and that the court did not find any reason to interfere at this stage.
Granting bail to the accused at this juncture, the bench said, could have a serious impact on the ongoing investigation and trial.
The court further observed that, based on material available so far, Kesireddy appeared to have direct links with shell companies that had deposited around Rs 750 crore in connection with the alleged irregularities.
These financial transactions were cited as significant in assessing the gravity of the case.
Counsel for Kesireddy informed the court that his client had been in judicial custody for the past nine months.
However, the Supreme Court remarked that in a case involving alleged financial irregularities exceeding Rs 700 crore, nine months in jail could not be considered excessive.
The defence sought time to place all relevant details pertaining to the case before the court. Accepting the request, the bench adjourned further hearing in the matter to Thursday.