In a significant ruling that strengthens the fight against corruption, the Supreme Court of India on Thursday overturned an order by the Andhra Pradesh High Court that had quashed multiple corruption-related FIRs. The apex court strongly criticized the high court's decision, labeling it a "travesty of justice" that could have created a legal vacuum for corrupt officials.
Legal Battle Over ACB's Jurisdiction
The core of the dispute centered on the jurisdictional powers of the Anti-Corruption Bureau's (ACB) Central Investigation Unit (CIU) in Vijayawada after the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh in 2014. Several government employees, accused of possessing disproportionate assets following ACB raids, had approached the high court. They argued that the CIU lacked the authority to register FIRs against them between 2014 and 2021 because it was not freshly notified as a competent police station post the state's division.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court accepted this argument and quashed the FIRs on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. This decision brought investigations into alleged corruption to a standstill for years.
Supreme Court's Firm Rebuttal and Legal Clarification
A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices M M Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma firmly set aside the high court's order. The bench clarified a crucial legal point regarding the continuation of laws after state reorganization.
The apex court held that, as per Sections 100, 101, and 102 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, all laws and notifications applicable to the undivided state continue to operate in both successor states unless specifically repealed or amended. Therefore, a 2003 government order that declared ACB offices as police stations remained fully valid even after bifurcation.
The court observed that a 2022 order was merely clarificatory in nature, reaffirming the existing legal position, and did not constitute a fresh notification as incorrectly interpreted by the high court. The Supreme Court warned that the high court's "hyper-technical interpretation" had unjustly stalled investigations and could allow corruption to go unchecked.
Directives and Future Course of Action
With its ruling, the Supreme Court has taken several consequential steps:
- Restored all FIRs quashed by the high court.
- Permitted the ACB to complete its investigations and file final reports within six months.
- Directed the ACB not to take any coercive steps, including arrest of the accused, during the investigation phase.
- Clarified that the accused retain the right to challenge the eventual charge sheets on other grounds or on the merits of the case once the probe concludes.
- Barred the Andhra Pradesh High Court from entertaining any further petitions challenging the FIRs on similar jurisdictional grounds.
This judgment provides much-needed clarity on the operational continuity of investigative agencies post-state reorganization and reinforces the legal framework to pursue corruption cases without being hindered by procedural technicalities.
