Chandrababu Naidu produced before Vijayawada court in AP skill development scam case

Earlier, the TDP chief was taken to the Government General Hospital at 3.40 am for medical tests before being taken back to the SIT office.

The CID has alleged that Naidu is the primary accused in the case, allegedly involving Rs 371 crore of government funds that were transferred to shell companies during the TDP’s rule in the state. It has submitted in its remand report that Naidu is the chief architect and conspirator of the alleged scam and that he indulged in a criminal conspiracy with the intention of fraudulent misappropriation or otherwise conversion for own use, disposal of property which was under the control of a public servant, besides engaging in cheating, forging documents, and destroying evidence.

The TDP leader is being represented by Supreme Court lawyer Siddharth Luthra and a team of senior lawyers.

Naidu’s lawyers seek to reject CID’s remand plea

In his plea, Naidu stated that he has been falsely implicated in the case for political gain. Listing the grounds to reject the CID’s remand application, his lawyers said that the petitioner was the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh when the alleged offence was committed and hence the prosecution has to obtain prior sanction of the Governor even to initiate an inquiry/investigation in the case.

They added that the alleged offences relate to policy decisions which were approved by the Cabinet and as such it is a decision of the government which cannot be questioned by initiating criminal proceedings. The lawyers also sought to point out that the state government had allocated Rs 360 crore in the 2015-16 budget for the Department of Skill Entrepreneurship and Innovation and the said allocation cannot be questioned through criminal proceedings.

The counsel said that as per the complaint and the remand report, no role was attributed to the petitioner in siphoning off the funds and there was no such allegation in the FIR registered on December 9, 2021. Moreover, no criminal complaint can be maintained relating to acts done in discharge of official duties. If there is any misuse of funds at any level, the same has to be dealt with in a different manner but not by prosecuting a former chief minister.

They also said that no material was brought on record by the prosecuting agency to make out a prima facie case against the accused or even to remand the petitioner in judicial custody.

The magistrate has to be first satisfied that the arrest is in accordance with the law, and since there is a clear statutory violation in not obtaining sanction for the probe, the remand request has to be rejected, the counsel argued.

Naidu’s wife N Bhuvaneswari, son N Lokesh, brother-in-law N Ramakrishna and his wife N Jayashree, and senior TDP leaders are present outside the court.