Supreme Court upholds High Court order quashing cash-for-vote case in opposition to ex-TDP member

Supreme Court. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld an Andhra Pradesh High Court determination quashing proceedings in opposition to Jerusalem Mathaiah, who’s the fourth accused within the notorious 2015 cash-for-vote case registered and investigated by the Telangana Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB).

The determination by a Bench of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Okay. Vinod Chandran could have a rippling impact on a petition filed by Telangana Chief Minister and former Telugu Desam Party (TDP) chief, A. Revanth Reddy, who can also be an accused within the case, to quash the FIR within the 2015 case. Mr. Reddy’s petition was listed earlier than a coordinate Bench of the highest court docket headed by Justice J.Okay. Maheshwari, however was adjourned to a date in October.

Chargesheet filed in 2015

Mr. Reddy was accused of paying ₹50 lakh bribe to Elvis Stephenson, a nominated MLA, for supporting TDP nominee Vem Narendar Reddy within the 2015 Legislative Council elections. Mr. Mathiah, a pastor after which a member of the TDP Christian Cell, was accused quantity 4 within the case. In July 2015, the ACB filed a chargesheet in opposition to Mr. Reddy and others underneath the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120B (legal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.

On Friday, Justice Chandran, who wrote the six-page judgment, mentioned there was nothing to hyperlink Mr. Mathiah with the alleged crime. The judgment famous that the details about the try to bribe Mr. Stephenson was acquired on May 28, 2015, however the FIR was registered solely two days later, on May 31.

“We can’t however discover that there’s nothing to attach the fourth accused to the crime, however for an off-the-cuff allegation raised on a name having been acquired by the complainant (ACB) with none indication even of the time when such a name was acquired. We discover completely no motive to intervene with the order of the High Court,” the Supreme Court concluded.

Published – September 27, 2025 12:45 am IST