Hearing on Naidu\'s Quash Petition in Skill Development Scam Postponed to Friday

Vijayawada: The hearing in the quash petition filed by Telugu Desam chief Nara Chandrababu Naidu in the skill development scam case has been postponed to Friday.

Naidu had filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking the dismissal of the case registered by the CID. The two-judge bench, after hearing the arguments on Tuesday, adjourned the hearing to October 13.

The bench of Justices Anirudhha Bose and Bela Trivedi in the Supreme Court heard Naidu’s counsel Harish Salve and AP government counsel Mukul Rohatgi over the applicability of Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act in this case.

As per the Section 17-A, investigation officers need to obtain prior approval of a competent authority before initiating any inquiry into the decisions taken by a public servant in discharge of his official duties.

Referring to the complaint filed by former Union minister Yashwant Sinha in alleged irregularities in the Rafale fighter jet deal, Salve told the court that the investigation against Naidu started only in 2021 and therefore the amendment would be applicable in this case.

The bench granted one hour for Salve to complete his argument. He said the object of the PCA was not only to strengthen the law on corruption but also to ensure that it was not abused. Justice Trivedi asked Salve whether 17-A was only procedural or it would confer any substantive rights to the accused.

Mukul Rohatgi began his submission with a brief timeline of the case. “Offences predate the 2018 amendment to the PC Act. Also, this is not a case of political vendetta because the FIR was registered in 2021. In 2023, Naidu was added as an accused, after (incriminating) material surfaced," he said.

Rohatgi said Naidu’s decisions or actions resulted in corruption and loss to the state. Referring to the 17-A of the PC Act, he said in a case of such large-scale corruption and misappropriation ex facie, not prima facie, can never be a part of a recommendation or decision in discharge of official function.

After lunch break, the bench posted the case for further hearing on Friday.