AP Liquor Scam: ACB Court Extends Remand for Seven Accused
Court Extends Judicial Custody
On May 20, 2025, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) Special Court in Vijayawada extended the judicial remand of seven accused in the Andhra Pradesh liquor scam until June 3, 2025. The decision followed the expiry of their initial remand period, with the Special Investigation Team (SIT) presenting the accused before the court. After hearing arguments from both sides, the judge issued orders to prolong the custody.
Accused Individuals
The accused include Kasireddy Rajasekhar Reddy, Sajjala Sridhar Reddy, Chanakya, Paila Dilip, Balaji Govindappa, Krishna Mohan Reddy, and Dhanunjaya Reddy. They were brought before the ACB Court by SIT officials for the hearing. The case, involving alleged financial irregularities in liquor trade, continues to draw significant attention.
Defense Concerns Raised
During the hearing, defense counsel highlighted the SIT’s failure to provide updates on the investigation’s progress. The court responded by directing the investigating officer to submit a comprehensive written report detailing the probe’s developments. This directive aims to ensure transparency in the ongoing investigation.
Humanitarian Consideration
The accused requested permission to communicate with their families, a plea the court considered on humanitarian grounds. The judge granted a 30-minute window for the accused to interact with their relatives. This decision reflects a balance between judicial process and human considerations.
Investigation Progress
The SIT’s probe into the liquor scam, estimated to involve financial irregularities worth thousands of crores, remains ongoing. The court’s insistence on a detailed report underscores the need for accountability in the investigation. Further hearings are expected to clarify additional aspects of the case.
Broader Implications
The liquor scam has sparked widespread discourse in Andhra Pradesh, with allegations pointing to systemic issues in the state’s liquor trade policies. The extended remand signals the judiciary’s intent to thoroughly examine the case. Public and political scrutiny continues to intensify as the investigation unfolds.