The Supreme Court has called for responses from the Andhra Pradesh police and others in relation to the ongoing criminal proceedings against Sunitha Narreddy, daughter of the deceased former Congress MP YS Vivekananda Reddy, and a CBI officer implicated in the case.
In a significant move on Tuesday, the bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar also addressed a separate plea regarding the bail of YS Avinash Reddy, who is accused of tampering with evidence in the murder of his uncle, the former MP, ahead of the 2019 assembly polls in Andhra Pradesh.
Avinash Reddy, a cousin of former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy, and his father YS Bhaskar Reddy, have been under scrutiny, with the latter arrested last April by the CBI in connection with Vivekananda Reddy’s murder. This tragic incident occurred at Vivekananda Reddy’s residence in Pulivendula, Kadapa district, on the night of March 15, 2019.
Initially handled by a state CID Special Investigation Team, the case was transferred to the CBI in July 2020, leading to the filing of a chargesheet in October 2021 and a supplementary chargesheet at the start of 2022. Representing Sunitha Narreddy, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra and lawyer Jesal Wahi argued against the criminal charges, which stem from an FIR lodged by MV Krishna Reddy, the former personal assistant of the deceased.
The FIR accused Sunitha Narreddy and CBI officer Ram Singh of coercing MV Krishna Reddy to provide false testimony, an allegation that led to further judicial directions in Pulivendula. Despite the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing a petition to quash the FIR in May 2024, the Supreme Court has now taken up the appeal, raising questions about the integrity of the ongoing proceedings.
In another twist, the top court is also reviewing a challenge to the bail granted to YS Avinash Reddy by the Telangana High Court, with allegations that he breached bail conditions by influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence. This includes accusations of threatening behavior towards Shaik Dastagiri, an approver in the case, and an alleged bribe attempt involving Rs 20 crore to alter testimonies.
