The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to businessman, Manoj Kumar Mutta in a case relating to the alleged manufacture and distribution of spurious liquor in Andhra Pradesh, observing that he was not named in the First Information Report (FIR) and that no search or raid was conducted at his business premises during the investigation.
The bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N. V. Anjaria has released the appellant on anticipatory bail for the reason that the appellant was not initially named in the FIR and no raid was ever conducted at his place of business.
The case arose from a raid conducted on October 6, 2025, by excise officials at Ravi Khirana General Stores in Ibrahimpatnam town and a nearby godown in Divya Complex. During the operation, officials allegedly seized 7,800 bottles of spurious liquor, approximately 3,325 litres of liquor blend, and machinery used for bottling and capping.
Investigators also raided the premises of A.N.R. Restaurant & Bar, where equipment used for manufacturing counterfeit liquor was allegedly recovered. According to the prosecution, the accused persons mixed spirit with water, caramel and other essences to produce fake versions of well-known liquor brands such as Old Admiral Brandy and Kerala Malt Whiskey.
During the investigation, statements of witnesses and co-accused suggested that the materials required for bottling, including plastic bottles and caps, were procured through the appellant, who was engaged in manufacturing plastic and aluminium bottle caps through his establishment in Vijayawada.
The prosecution also relied on call records showing communication between the appellant and other accused persons, along with certain financial transactions between the appellant and one of the accused. Based on this material, investigators sought to include the appellant as an accused in the case.
The appellant argued that he had not been named in the FIR and that the investigation had initially involved another person with a similar name. It was also contended that no search had been carried out at the appellant’s premises and that there was no evidence linking him directly to the alleged manufacturing of spurious liquor.
The defence further pointed out that the Supreme Court had earlier granted interim protection from arrest in January 2026 and that the appellant had complied with the Court’s directions by appearing before the investigating officer and cooperating with the probe.
After considering the submissions, the Supreme Court observed that the appellant was not named in the FIR and that none of the raids conducted during the investigation were carried out at his premises. The Court also noted that the appellant had complied with the interim protection order and had cooperated with the investigation.
In view of these circumstances, the Court held that custodial interrogation of the appellant was not necessary at this stage.
Allowing the appeal, the Court set aside the High Court’s order rejecting anticipatory bail and made the interim protection from arrest absolute. It directed that in the event of arrest in connection with Crime registered at Bhavanipuram Prohibition and Excise Police Station in NTR District, the appellant shall be released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions imposed by the arresting authority or the trial court.
The Court further directed the appellant to continue cooperating with the investigation and not to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.
Case Details
Case Title: Manoj Kumar Mutta Versus State of AP
Citation: JURISHOUR-297-SC-2026
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No.1263 Of 2026
Date: 10/03/2026
Read More: Sale Agreement Executed as Security for Loan Not Enforceable: Supreme Court
