ACB Court Remands Raj KasiReddy for 14 Days in Liquor Scam
Vijayawada ACB Court sends prime accused Raj KasiReddy to judicial custody till May 6
CID argues applicability of PC Act; defense challenges SIT's legality and court jurisdiction
KasiReddy accused of orchestrating ₹3,200 crore liquor commission racket
In a significant development in the high-profile Andhra Pradesh liquor scam, the Vijayawada ACB Special Court has remanded Raj KasiReddy, the main accused in the case, to 14 days of judicial custody. The order was passed by Judicial Magistrate Bhaskara Rao around 12:30 am on Tuesday, following a lengthy courtroom debate between CID officials and the defense. Subsequently, the accused was shifted to Vijayawada District Jail.
KasiReddy, who served as an IT advisor in the previous government, was arrested by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) and taken for a medical examination before being produced in court. During the hearing, the judge raised concerns over the case being presented in the ACB court instead of the CID court. At one point, the remand was nearly rejected, with suggestions to modify the memo and refer it to the CID court.
However, Advocate General Dammalapati Srinivas and Public Prosecutor Kalyani, representing the CID, argued that the case falls under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act), thus placing it within ACB court’s jurisdiction. They clarified that while permission under Section 17(A) was required for interrogating government officials like co-accused Satya Prasad, it was not necessary for KasiReddy as he was not a government employee.
According to the CID, KasiReddy allegedly used his influence over the AP Beverages Corporation to devise a commission-collection mechanism from liquor companies, amassing over ₹3,200 crore in five years. Statements from former Corporation MD Vasudeva Reddy and Special Officer Satya Prasad were cited in support. It was also revealed that Satya Prasad was brought to AP on a political recommendation, with a promise of IAS confirmation.
In his defense, senior advocate Ponnavolu Sudhakar Reddy questioned the legality of the SIT and the ACB court’s jurisdiction, claiming the PC Act was not applicable to his client and urging the court to reject the remand.
After considering all submissions, the judge ordered 14-day judicial custody till May 6.