Gade Sai Krishna Case: YSRCP MP Gurumoorthy withdraws petition in Supreme Court
His counsel submitted that the petition in the apex court was being withdrawn in light of the High Court division bench already ordering a CBI probe, and the CBI subsequently registering an FIR and launching its investigation.
YSRCP MP Maddila Gurumoorthy has withdrawn his petition filed before the Supreme Court concerning the private complaint case regarding Gade Sai Krishna, who died in alleged illegal police custody at the Krishnalanka Police Station in Vijayawada.
His counsel submitted that the petition in the apex court was being withdrawn in light of the High Court division bench already ordering a CBI probe, and the CBI subsequently registering an FIR and launching its investigation.
Stating that they would pursue their legal battle in the petition pending before the High Court, the petitioner sought permission to withdraw, following which the three-judge bench of the Supreme Court dismissed the case as withdrawn.
On Tuesday, a three-judge bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta, and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh heard the case YCP MP Maddila Gurumoorthy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (SLP 016915/2026).
Senior Advocate Nikhil Goel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the Special Leave Petition was filed in the Supreme Court against the orders passed by the lower court on a plea seeking the quashing of a private complaint.
He stated that on October 16, a division bench of the High Court directed the transfer of the investigation to the CBI, and urged that the findings recorded by the lower court on merits be expunged from the record.
The counsel referred to the court’s observation during the hearing of a habeas corpus petition, where it noted that the State Police’s Commissionerate Task Force had influenced the victim’s family members, and recalled the court’s remarks that the investigation was not conducted properly.
Bench questions petitioner’s standing
During the hearing, the bench made key observations regarding the petitioner’s submissions. It remarked that there were serious questions regarding the petitioner’s locus standi (standing/eligibility) to prosecute this private complaint.
Rejecting the plea to expunge the lower court’s remarks, the bench observed that the issue should be resolved before the High Court itself.
The bench questioned the necessity of the petition before the Supreme Court at this stage, given that the High Court had already transferred the case to the CBI.
Following the Supreme Court’s remarks, the petitioner’s counsel stated that they would withdraw the petition and contest the matter before the High Court.
After the arguments, the three-judge bench passed its order. It took on record that the High Court division bench had directed the transfer of the investigation to the CBI on October 16, and that the CBI had already registered an FIR and taken up the probe.
Granting liberty to pursue the petition pending before the High Court, the court permitted petitioner Gurumoorthy to withdraw the present petition before the Supreme Court.