The Supreme Court has set aside the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order quashing 13 FIRs filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau against public servants. It directed the ACB to complete investigations within six months and barred further challenges on technical grounds.
On January 8, 2026, the Supreme Court of India overturned a decision by the Andhra Pradesh High Court that had nullified 13 First Information Reports (FIRs) registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The FIRs targeted public servants accused of amassing wealth disproportionate to their known sources of income.
The High Court had quashed the FIRs on technical grounds, arguing that the ACB's Central Investigation Unit (CIU) in Vijayawada was not properly notified as a police station under Section 2(s) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before August 14, 2022. This stemmed from the 2014 bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, after which the ACB shifted from Hyderabad to Vijayawada in 2016. A 2003 order had designated the ACB in Hyderabad as a police station, but the High Court held that pre-bifurcation laws did not automatically apply post-2014 without fresh notification.
A bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma criticized the High Court's 'hyper technical' approach as a 'travesty of justice.' They emphasized substance over form, noting that a 2022 government order clarified the ACB Vijayawada's jurisdiction statewide. 'The high court took undue pains to ensure that the FIRs are quashed,' the bench observed, dismissing the need for retrospective application of the clarification.
The Supreme Court reinstated the FIRs, directing the accused public servants, including former Motor Vehicle Inspector Dayam Peda Ranga Rao, to cooperate with investigations. The ACB must file final reports within six months without coercive actions. The High Court was barred from entertaining further challenges on jurisdictional grounds, though accused individuals may still contest completed chargesheets under law.
This ruling revives anti-corruption probes initiated between 2016 and 2020, underscoring the judiciary's push for practical enforcement amid post-bifurcation administrative shifts.
