Published Nov 05, 2026 | 2:07 PM ⚊ Updated Nov 05, 2026 | 2:07 PM
Supreme Court. (iStock)
The Supreme Court on Thursday, 5 November, dismissed a petition seeking the transfer of the trial in the Tirumala Srivari laddu ghee adulteration case from Andhra Pradesh to another state.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi declined to entertain the plea filed by Machindra Shantaram Lanke, a Maharashtra-based dairy entrepreneur and Managing Director of Malganga Milk and Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., who is arraigned as one of the accused in the adulterated ghee supply case.
Also Read: Andhra Pradesh appoints Special Authority to oversee TTD administration
Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave contended that continuous public statements by political leaders had fostered a hostile atmosphere incompatible with a fair and impartial trial.
“The matter has become thoroughly politicized, creating an adverse environment across the state. Both the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister have made public statements on the issue,” Dave submitted before the bench. He further alleged that political figures continued to make such remarks despite forensic reports ruling out the presence of animal fat in the ghee.
Arguing that an impartial prosecutorial process could not be guaranteed under the prevailing circumstances in Andhra Pradesh—even if the presiding trial judge remained uninfluenced by political rhetoric—counsel urged the court to shift the proceedings outside the state. “We are merely praying that the case concerning the ghee used in the preparation of Tirumala laddus be transferred to any neighbouring state where it is not such an emotive issue,” Dave appealed.
“Please take note of the nature of the statements being made by political leaders. They severely prejudice my right to a fair trial, and no one is immune to such an environment,” Dave submitted to the bench.
“The trial will unfold in a deeply hostile political climate, and the petitioner alone will bear the brunt of it, reduced to a pawn in a political crossfire. I am not even requesting that the trial be shifted to Delhi—only to a neighbouring state. Moreover, this is a CBI prosecution, and since most of the accused hail from northern India, they also face a significant language barrier.”
After hearing the petitioner’s submissions, the bench expressed its disinclination to grant the relief sought.
The court pointed out that the investigation had been conducted by an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Supreme Court itself.
Clarifying that the vast majority of witnesses and material evidence are located within Andhra Pradesh, the apex court dismissed the petition seeking the transfer of the trial to another state.
(Edited by Sumavarsha)
