Telangana High Court directs AP CID not to take coercive steps against Ramoji Rao & Ch Sailaja until further orders

Hyderabad: Justice BollamVijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Monday directed the Andhra Pradesh Crime Investigation Department (CID) not to take any coercive steps against Ramoji Rao and Ch. Sailaja, who run the Margadarsi Chit Fund in Telangana and AP.

The court further directed the AP CID not to undertake any search operation on any of the branches of Margadarsi Chit Fund in Telangana till March 20.

Justice Reddy was hearing a lunch motion writ petition filed by P Rajaji, vice-president of Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd seeking a direction to AP CID not to take any coercive steps against any officials in Margadarsi branches, especially, Ramoji Rao and Sailaja.

During arguments, the judge queried the petitioner's counsel on maintainability of the petition, where the FIRs are registered in AP and the investigation is done by the AP CID.

Govind Reddy, special standing counsel for AP government, informed the court that the petitioners have committed financial fraud in AP, residing in Telangana and that cannot be a reason for the AP CID personnel to make searches on Margadarsi chit fund branches in Telangana and take action against Ramoji Rao and Sailaja.

The judge adjourned the petition to March 20 directing AP CID not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners and not to make any searches on Margadarsi chit fund company branches. He said a decision will be taken on the maintainability of the petition in the next hearing.

Court reserves orders in YS Viveka murder case on MP Avinash Reddy's plea to stay further CBI examination, no coercive action

The high court single bench of Justice K Lakshman on Monday adjudicated the petition filed by Kadapa MP YS Avinash Reddy, seeking to stay further examination of CBI against him in the YS Vivekananda Reddy murder case.

Avinash urged the court to direct the respondent CBI not to take any coercive action pursuant to the notice issued. He prayed that further examination should be conducted in the presence of his advocate; audio and video recording of the entire questioning by CBI should be done.

T Niranjan Reddy, senior counsel for petitioner, informed the court that Parliament session was on and it is inevitable to attend the session. He requested the court to exempt Avinash Reddy from appearing before the CBI investigation on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Justice Lakshman said, why don't you give a representation (Letter) to the CBI to attend the Parliament session. He was

angry over Avinash holding a media conference outside CBI office, after questioning. "It's sheer contempt of court. When the matter is sub judice, what made him comment on the issue, he questioned.

Counsel Niranjan Reddy argued that CBI was behind Sunitha's petition. "There are political pressures behind Sunita's charge. A Year after Viveka's murder she makes accusations. He alleged that CBI was not investigating the role of Viveka's son-in-law Rajasekhar Reddy and Viveka's second wife Shamim as facts will come out.

CBI standing counsel Nagendra submitted the Viveka murder case diary to the court in a sealed cover. The CBI submitted 35 witness statements, 10 documents, and hard disks to the court, besides the letter found at the murder spot and the FSL report.

After hearing both sides, the court reserved its orders. It directed CBI not to take any further action against Avinash until the final verdict, which may come within a day or two.

HC issues notices to State govt on its decision to regularise 11.5 lakh hectares of Podu lands

On Monday the division bench comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N Tukaramji issued notices to the BRS government directing it to respond to the notices by June 22 duly furnishing reasons for regularising 11.5 lakh hectares of forest land in favour of persons, who are occupying it, irrespective of the date from which they are in occupation,

Notices were issued to the Chief Secretary, Special Chief Secretary (Environment, Forest, Science and Technology), Principal Secretary (Tribal Welfare), Commissioner of Tribal Welfare, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and Secretary, Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs.

The bench directed the government to adhere scrupulously to the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) (ROFR) Act, 2006 and rules made there under, especially Rule 13.

The bench was adjudicating WP(PIL)7/2023 filed by the Forum for Good Governance (NGO) represented by its secretary M Padmanabha Reddy, IAS (retd) seeking a stay on memo no. 1161/TW .Ser 11/2021 dated November 5,2021 issued by the Principal Secretary Tribal Welfare, through which the government decided to regularise 11.5 lakh hectares of forest land in favour of persons in occupation.

Satyam Reddy, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, informed the court that the government was going ahead with indiscriminate regularisation of forest lands, without adhering to the Act.

The bench allowed the interim application filed by Chikkudu Prabhakar, advocate, seeking to implead ST and other dwellers represented by Kabbaka Shravan Kumar, general secretary, TudumDebba, Warangal District. Hearing in the case was adjourned to June 22.