The Supreme Court will hear on Friday a plea filed by the Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging observations made by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which held that the CBI chief had violated the apex court’s earlier directions by appointing an officer outside the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe allegations of adulterated ghee in the famous Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (TTD) laddu prasadam.

 

When the matter was mentioned before a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran on Monday, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, requested that the matter be listed later as the SIT investigation was still in progress. Accepting the request, the bench directed the case to be posted for detailed hearing on Friday.

 

The controversy stems from a judgment delivered by Justice Harinath N. of the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

 

The High Court noted that J. Venkat Rao, an officer who had been actively involved in the investigation, was not one of the officials formally nominated as part of the SIT created pursuant to the Supreme Court’s directions in 2024.

 

Accordingly, the High Court ruled that:

• Venkat Rao could not be treated as a valid SIT member.

• He had no authority to independently investigate the matter or issue summons to witnesses.

 

The Court observed that the inclusion of an officer outside the notified SIT amounted to a deviation from the mandate given by the Supreme Court.

 

The High Court was acting on a plea filed by Kaduru Chinnappanna, who alleged that he had received notices from Investigating Officer J. Venkat Rao summoning him to appear before the SIT office in Tirupati.

 

The petitioner alleged that:

• He was “compelled, forced and intimidated” into recording false scripted statements before the SIT.

• The proceedings were videotaped, further creating pressure.

• He was forced to act under the “dictates” of Respondent No. 10, i.e., Venkat Rao.

 

On these grounds, the petitioner sought directions ensuring a free and fair investigation by the duly constituted SIT.

 

It may be recalled that in 2024, the Supreme Court itself had constituted an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe allegations of adulteration in the preparation of ghee used in Tirupati laddus, which are widely regarded as sacred prasadam of the Tirumala temple.

 

The apex court had directed that the SIT would consist of:

• Two officers from the CBI, nominated by the CBI Director.

• Two officers of the Andhra Pradesh State Police, nominated by the State Government.

• One senior official from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).

 

This structure was meant to ensure impartiality and credibility of the investigation into the sensitive issue, given the religious and cultural significance of the Tirupati laddu.

 

The CBI Director has now approached the Supreme Court, contesting the High Court’s observations which, according to the agency, undermine the SIT’s functioning and the apex court’s own directions.

 

The outcome of Friday’s hearing will be crucial in determining whether the inclusion of J. Venkat Rao in the probe was irregular and whether the investigation so far may be affected.