The Supreme Court refused to transfer the trial in the Tirupati laddus ghee adulteration case outside Andhra Pradesh. The accused cited political statements and a language barrier, but the court said shifting the trial would affect witnesses
Updated On – 5 November 2026, 05:43 PM
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a plea seeking the transfer of the trial in the Tirupati laddus ghee adulteration case out of Andhra Pradesh.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi dismissed the petition filed by accused Machindra Shantaram Lanke, a Maharashtra-based dairy industry businessman and managing director of Malganga Milk and Agro Products Pvt Ltd.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Lanke, submitted that political leaders were continuing to make statements about the case, creating a hostile atmosphere for a fair trial.
“It has become a political issue. There is a hostile environment in the State. The Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister are continuously making statements with regard to the case,” Dave said.
Dave argued that despite the forensic report ruling out the presence of animal fat in the ghee, political leaders continued to make statements on the issue.
“Please transfer the case to the adjoining State, for a free and fair trial. Most of the accused are from North India. There is also a language barrier,” he submitted, adding that although the trial judge might not be influenced by the comments, a fair prosecution could not be expected in such a scenario.
Chief Justice Surya Kant told Dave, “We have silenced them all with our order. If something happens, you can come to us.”
Dave further submitted, “Please see the kind of statements that are being made. It causes prejudice to me in my trial. Nobody is immune from it. The trial will be in a very politically hostile environment. The only person who will suffer is me. I am being used in the fight between politicians. I am not even asking that it be brought here. Just any neighbouring State. After all, it is a CBI prosecution; most of the accused are from the north, there is a strong language barrier.”
The bench, however, expressed its disinclination to transfer the trial, observing that several witnesses were from Andhra Pradesh and that shifting the proceedings would affect the trial.
It also pointed out that the investigation had been conducted by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Supreme Court itself.
“We are not inclined to transfer the trial. Dismissed,” the bench ordered.
On October 4, 2024, the Supreme Court constituted a five-member independent SIT to probe allegations that animal fat had been used in preparing Tirupati laddus. The court said the move was intended to “assuage the feelings of crores of people” while making it clear that the court could not be used as a “political battleground”.
The development was significant as the Supreme Court-appointed panel replaced the Andhra Pradesh government’s SIT, constituted on September 26, 2024, to investigate the politically sensitive controversy over the alleged use of animal fat in the preparation of the laddus.
The court directed that the independent SIT comprise two officers each from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Andhra Pradesh Police, besides a senior official of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
It said the two CBI officers would be nominated by the agency’s director, while the two Andhra Pradesh Police officers would be named by the State government. The FSSAI chairperson would nominate a senior official of the authority to be part of the SIT, it said.
The court also directed that the SIT function under the supervision of the CBI director.
Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu had earlier claimed that animal fat was used in preparing Tirupati laddus during the previous Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy-led government, triggering a major political controversy.
The YSR Congress Party accused Naidu of making “heinous allegations” for political gains, while the ruling Telugu Desam Party circulated a laboratory report to support its claim.
The Supreme Court had passed the order on a batch of petitions, including those seeking a court-monitored probe into the alleged use of animal fat in the preparation of the laddus.
