SC sets aside AP High Court judgment in ACB cases

New Delhi / Vijayawada: The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which had quashed multiple FIRs registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against public servants in Andhra Pradesh.

The apex court directed the accused public servants to fully cooperate for the expeditious completion of the investigation. It further instructed the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Andhra Pradesh, to file final reports in the concerned cases within six months. At the same time, the Supreme Court ordered that no coercive steps, including arrest, shall be taken against the respondents/public servants during this period. Importantly, the Apex Court also directed the Andhra Pradesh High Court not to entertain any further challenges to the FIRs or the ongoing investigations. Earlier, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, on August 1, 2025, quashed 13 FIRs registered by the Central Investigation Unit (CIU), ACB, Andhra Pradesh, in a batch of criminal appeals.

These cases related to allegations of public servants amassing assets disproportionate to their known sources of income. The High Court had nullified the FIRs purely on technical grounds, holding that the CIU, ACB was notified as a police station only on September 14, 2022, while the FIRs were registered prior to that date.

Following the bifurcation of the State in 2014, the Office of the Director General, ACB and CIU functioned initially from Hyderabad and later shifted to Vijayawada on October 4, 2016. Subsequently, State Home Department formally notified the CIU, ACB as a police station with jurisdiction over the entire State.

Aggrieved by the High Court’s decision, the Anti-Corruption Bureau filed Special Leave Petitions before the Supreme Court. After detailed hearings, the Apex Court allowed the SLPs, restoring the FIRs and permitting the investigations to proceed.

The Supreme Court’s order is seen as a significant boost to anti-corruption efforts in Andhra Pradesh, reaffirming the primacy of substantive justice over procedural technicalities.