In a major setback to YSRCP Lok Sabha leader Mithun Reddy, the AP High Court has dismissed his petition seeking anticipatory bail in the AP liquor bribery case. The court has made it clear that anticipatory bail cannot be granted at this stage. MP Mithun Reddy is the A4 accused in the liquor bribery case.
Senior advocate Siddhartha Luthra, appearing for the CID/SIT, argued in the High Court that the liquor orders and supply system was previously transparent through the online system, and MP Mithun Reddy (A4) played a key role in bringing it to a manual system. He said that liquor supply permits were given only to companies that received bribes.
He said that the liquor scam during the YSRCP government caused a loss of Rs. 3,500 crore to the state exchequer. He argued that Mithun Reddy played a major role in diverting the money and acted as the mastermind of the liquor scam from the time it was planned to its execution. He also explained that evidence related to this has been found.
He told the court that if Mithun Reddy is arrested and interrogated, it will be known where the bribe money ultimately ended up. It was brought to the court’s attention that Rs. 5 crore was deposited in the bank account of Mithun Reddy’s family’s PLR Projects Private Limited from Dekart Logistics Private Limited (A16) as bribes.
He said that gold ornaments were purchased with the money received through bribes. He also said that Mithun Reddy has a criminal record and that 8 cases have been registered against him. Luthra urged the court to dismiss Mithun Reddy’s petition, saying that he was ineligible for anticipatory bail.
Senior advocate T. Niranjan Reddy arguing on behalf of MP Mithun Reddy said that the petitioner had nothing to do with the liquor policy brought by the government and that Mithun Reddy was not a director of PLR Projects. He said that there was no evidence to suggest that the petitioner had committed any crime except the testimony of a witness that the Rs.5 crore received by PLR from Decard Logistics was paid back to that company.
After hearing the arguments of both the parties, the court recently reserved its verdict and issued orders on Tuesday dismissing the anticipatory bail petition.
