Three petitioners — a retired IAS officer (former Secretary to the Chief Minister), a retired Special Deputy Collector (OSD in the CM's Office), and a private individual — sought regular bail before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in connection with an alleged large-scale liquor policy scam involving APSBCL during 2019–2024, registered as Crime No.21 of 2024. They had earlier been granted default bail by the Special Court, which was set aside by the High Court; their Special Leave Petitions before the Supreme Court were dismissed, though interim protection was continued to enable them to seek regular bail. The petitioners argued parity with co-accused already on bail, completion of investigation, prolonged pre-trial detention violating Article 21, senior citizen status, and no adverse conduct during interim release, while the State opposed bail citing their role as key facilitators of the scam and the pendency of sanction for prosecution. The High Court set out the governing bail jurisprudence — including principles from P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement, Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, and Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb — and framed the point for determination as whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail, but the judgment text as provided does not record the final operative order.