Andhra Pradesh High Court says CBI Director delegated Tirupati Laddu probe in violation of SC order

The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently held that the Director of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) illegally nominated the investigating officer (IO) in the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the Tirupati laddu case [Kaduru Chinnappanna v The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors]..Justice Harinath N said that the SIT constituted by the Supreme Court did not include J Venkat Rao, but the CBI Director later nominated him as the IO. The CBI Director could not have directed Rao to conduct the investigation and it was contrary to the directions of the Supreme Court, Justice Harinath said. “Inclusion of 10th respondent as investigating officer over and above the number of reconstituted SIT is not permissible and would certainly over reach the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the Court said. Therefore, it ordered the CBI Director to conduct free and fair probe in the case and oversee the whole thing. “For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondent No.2 to conduct a free and fair investigation by supervising the investigation which is to be conducted by the SIT reconstituted as per the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”.The Bench passed the direction after an accused named Kaduru Chinnappanna moved the High Court seeking directions for a fair probe in the case. The laddu controversy erupted in November 2024 when Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu alleged that animal fat was being used to make Tirupati laddus under the previous Congress government. Initially, the State government constituted an SIT to probe the matter. The Supreme Court substituted it with an SIT to be composed of two officers of the CBI, two officers of the State Government, and one officer of the FSSAI. The new SIT was to function under the supervision of the CBI Director. However, Chinnappanna stated that the Director CBI delegated the investigation to an officer, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Tirupati, who was also a member of the previous SIT constituted by the State government.Chinnappanna argued that this was done in violation of the Supreme Court order. .The High Court agreed with the argument and declared Rao’s nomination illegal. Advocate Uday Kumar Vampugadavala appeared for the petitioner. CBI was represented through its Special Public Prosecutor (SPP), PSP Suresh Kumar. State government was represented by Government Pleader..[Read Order]