-Galla S Kiran Kumar,Bureau Chief Telagana (Andhra Pradesh)
On Monday, the High Court passed its judgment transferring the responsibility of investigating the FIR registered in the Moinabad Farm House case of seduction of MLAs from the SIT to the CBI. It is said that the formation of SIT for the investigation of this case is invalid.
Formation of SIT is invalid
Dismissal of investigation so far
Petition of accused is allowed
Dismissal of BJP’s plea
The High Court delivered the verdict
Suspension of execution pending receipt of copy
Today – Hyderabad
There is no doubt that this case is serious. However, the relevant key documents were exposed while the investigation was in its preliminary stages. The government did not give any answer in its counter on the issue of who gave the investigation information to the Chief Minister. There is no information about who gave the video taken while the accused were talking to the MLAs to the CM. However, due to the disclosure of the information of the investigation, the accused are naturally worried that the investigation will not be conducted in an impartial and transparent manner.
On Monday, the High Court passed its verdict transferring the responsibility of investigating the FIR registered in Moinabad Farm House to the CBI from the SIT. It is said that the formation of SIT for the investigation of this case is invalid. It ordered that all the relevant evidence be transferred to the CBI while canceling the investigation conducted so far.
Bharatiya Janata Party State General Secretary G. Premender Reddy along with the accused Ramchandra Bharti alias Satish Sharma, Kore Nandakumar alias Nandu, Simhayaji, lawyer Bhusarapu Srinivas and Tushar Vellapally from Kerala have filed separate petitions to hand over the investigation to the CBI in the case registered by the police for baiting the MLAs. Justice B.Vijaysen Reddy, after hearing long arguments on them, pronounced the verdict. The judge agreed with the concerns expressed by the accused over the disclosure of the investigation information in this case. It is not necessary to prove whether the investigation is biased or not. Suspicions were expressed by the accused that there was no impartial and transparent investigation. The problem should be seen from the point of view of the accused. Does the way the investigation is going do them any harm? Or? should be examined. Article 20 of the Constitution, Under 21 the right of the accused is not only a transparent investigation but also an investigation. Incidents and information that go public can harm the accused. In this context, it is justified for the CBI to investigate the case’, the judgment stated. In the judgment, the judge also mentioned the argument made by the counsel for the complainant, MLA Rohit Reddy, that the information of the investigation may have been disclosed. It is stated that investigation information should not be shared with other authorities or the media. The judge described the Bharatiya Janata Party as a third party in this case. He said that the petition filed by that party to hand over the responsibility of the investigation to the CBI is not admissible. It was dismissed stating that the petition as a third party is invalid regardless of the case. The judgment was passed allowing the petitions filed by Srinivas and Tushar Vellapalli along with the accused. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by Hyderabad Police Commissioner CV Anand has been set up to investigate the case, and GIO 63 issued by the government has been dismissed. Along with the investigation done by the Moinabad police before the formation of the SIT, it has been stated that the SIT investigation is being cancelled. Moinabad Police transferred the FIR to CBI and issued a verdict. Advocate General B. S. Prasad requested that the execution of the judgment be stayed till the judgment is delivered, but the judge allowed it. An order was issued suspending the execution till the judgment is pronounced. Moinabad Police transferred the FIR to CBI and issued a verdict. Advocate General B. S. Prasad requested that the execution of the judgment be stayed till the judgment is delivered, but the judge allowed it. An order was issued suspending the execution till the judgment is pronounced. Moinabad Police transferred the FIR to CBI and issued a verdict. Advocate General B. S. Prasad requested that the execution of the judgment be stayed till the judgment is delivered, but the judge allowed it. An order was issued suspending the execution till the judgment is pronounced.
Possibility of appeal
The decision of the single judge transferring the investigation of the MLA baiting case to the CBI is likely to be challenged before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan. It remains to be seen whether an appeal will be filed seeking exemption from copying before the judgment, or whether an appeal will be filed after the judgment stating clear reasons.
