The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the State of Telangana’s challenge to a High Court order that had quashed criminal proceedings against a legislator accused of being involved in a sensational bribery episode linked to the 2015 Legislative Council elections. The bench, led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, firmly held that the case against the accused, identified as A4 in the charge sheet, lacked any substantial evidence.
Background
The controversy dates back to May 2015, just before the MLC elections. A complaint was lodged by an MLA who claimed he had been offered an initial bribe of ₹2 crore and a foreign trip in exchange for voting in favour of a particular political party. Later, according to him, the offer was raised to ₹5 crore, allegedly through another intermediary.
Read also: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Delhi Couple Accused of ₹6 Crore Land Fraud, Orders Fresh Custody
The complaint reached the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) of Hyderabad, which eventually registered an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, glaring inconsistencies emerged. The written complaint was made on 28 May 2015, but the FIR was formally recorded only on 31 May 2015, hours before the elections. Audio and video recordings were arranged at the complainant’s friend’s residence, and money was allegedly exchanged, but the role of A4 remained vague.
Court’s Observations
During arguments, the State, represented by senior advocate Dr. Menaka Guruswamy, insisted that the High Court had committed a serious error by effectively conducting a “mini trial” at the stage of quashing. “There were recordings, recovery of money, and material to show cognizable offences,” she argued.
On the other hand, the defence maintained that there was “absolutely no material” against A4, and the High Court was justified in quashing proceedings.
Justice Chandran, writing the order, observed that while the High Court’s ruling was lengthy and cited numerous precedents, its reasoning was sound. The bench said, “We are not convinced that there was a mini trial conducted or that there was no justifiable reason to quash the complaint.”
Importantly, the Court noted that A4 was not present when the alleged transaction occurred. The only link was a vague reference to a call received by the complainant, with no mention of time or context.
Read also: Supreme Court Orders Liquidation of Bhushan Power & Steel, Quashes JSW’s ₹19,350 Crore Resolution Plan
Decision
The Supreme Court concluded that there was no basis to interfere with the High Court’s findings. “We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court and dismiss the Special Leave Petitions,” the bench ruled.
With this, the long-drawn battle over A4’s role in the alleged cash-for-vote scandal effectively comes to an end, at least as far as this accused is concerned. The Court also disposed of all pending applications in the matter.
Case: State of Telangana v. Jerusalem Mathai & Anr.
Citation: 2025 INSC 1173
Case No.: SLP (Crl.) No.5248 of 2016 & SLP (Crl.) No.9333 of 2016
Date of Judgment: 26 September 2025