The Supreme Court of India has granted anticipatory bail to Manoj Kumar Mutta, a businessman accused of involvement in a spurious liquor manufacturing racket in Andhra Pradesh. A Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria set aside the order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which had previously refused to grant the appellant protection from arrest.
The primary legal issue was whether the appellant was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now relevant under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) in connection with Crime No. 171 of 2025. The Court concluded that since the appellant was not named in the initial First Information Report (FIR), no raids were conducted at his premises, and he had cooperated with the investigation under interim protection, the grant of anticipatory bail was justified.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a raid conducted by Excise Officials on October 6, 2025, at the shop of Addepalli Jagan Mohana Rao (Accused No. 2) and a nearby godown in Ibrahimpatnam Town. The officials seized 7,800 bottles of spurious liquor, 3,325 litres of spurious liquor blend, and bottling machinery. A subsequent raid at A.N.R. Restaurant & Bar revealed equipment used to produce counterfeit versions of brands like ‘Old Admiral Brandy’ and ‘Kerala Malt Whiskey’.
The appellant, who runs ‘Sha Misrimal Hirachand Empty Glass Bottles Wholesale’ in Vijayawada, was later implicated following the custodial interrogation of Accused Nos. 1 and 2. It was alleged that the appellant supplied the plastic bottles and caps required for the bottling unit. He was subsequently added as Accused No. 20 in the FIR through a memo dated October 30, 2025.
Arguments of the Parties
For the Appellant: Senior Counsel Shri K. Parameshwar argued that the appellant was not initially named in the FIR and that there was significant “confusion about his identity.” He pointed out that no raids were conducted at the appellant’s business establishment and that the appellant had no connection with A.N.R. Restaurant & Bar. Furthermore, it was submitted that the appellant had been granted interim protection on January 6, 2026, and had appeared before the Investigating Officer on multiple dates, demonstrating full cooperation.
For the State: Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Shri S.V. Raju opposed the plea, describing it as a “serious case of production of spurious liquor.” He contended that witnesses had identified the appellant as the supplier of empty bottles and caps bearing fake Government labels. The State argued that custodial interrogation was essential to “find out the larger conspiracy and money trail” involving the manufacture and supply of spurious liquor across the state.
The Court’s Analysis
The Supreme Court observed that the appellant’s name surfaced only during investigation and subsequent memos filed by the prosecution. The Bench noted that the raids on October 6, 2025, were conducted at premises that “do not belong to the appellant.”
The Court highlighted the importance of the appellant’s conduct during the period of interim protection:
“In the present case, he has been granted interim protection from arrest by this Court vide order dated 6.1.2026 and he has appeared before the Investigating Officer. There is no allegation that the appellant has misused the liberty granted.”
While the State pointed to previous criminal cases registered against the appellant, the Court noted that he had been arrested and released on bail in those instances and that the current allegations remained to be proven through trial.
The Decision
Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court made the interim protection absolute. The Court directed:
“In the event of arrest, the appellant shall be released on anticipatory bail… on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the officer arresting the appellant or the Trial Court, as the case may be, subject to further conditions that the appellant shall always cooperate with the investigation and during trial and shall not influence the witnesses.”
Case Details
- Case Title: Manoj Kumar Mutta v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
- Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 1263 of 2026 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 20419 of 2025)
- Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria
- Date: March 10, 2026
