Telangana High Court judge D Nagarjun on Monday dismissed the amendment application filed by the special investigation team
Post Date – 12:19 AM, Tue – 1/3/23
Hyderabad: Telangana High Court judge D Nagarjun on Monday dismissed an amendment petition filed by the Special Investigations Team (SIT) in the MLA poaching case.
The memorandum filed by SIT in the ACB Court involving BL Santosh, Thushar Vellappally, Jaggu Swamy and Advocate B Srinivas was dismissed.
Challenged as illegal, the state has approached the high court. Senior Counsel L Ravichander and Ramchander Rao represented the accused and offered to be accused in the case. However, detailed orders are awaited.
In a related matter, Judge K Surendar extended the stay period in favor of BL Santosh until January 23 against the Section 41-A notice issued to him by SIT in this case.
Lawyers representing BL Santosh said the high court’s order to refer the investigation to the CBI was put on hold until the state obtained a certified copy and asked the court for an adjournment.
Disha case
A two-judge panel comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N Tukaramji continued to hear Supreme Court advocate Vrinda Grover in the case of Disha’s encounter. The public interest litigation case was filed alleging that the encounter was a sham extrajudicial killing.
Vrinda Grover said the three-member Sirpukar committee, which was formed by the Supreme Court, was not convinced that the police used the encounter as self-defense. She said the committee’s report was sufficient to identify and register the FIR of the officers involved in the encounter.
Referring to the Supreme Court judgment in the Manipur encounter case, she argued that the Supreme Court had directed to register FIR in cases where the committee of inquiry recommended action against the police. FIRs and investigations are constitutional and statutory obligations of the state, she argues and accuses the state government of not gathering evidence from the right perspective.
Grover argued that the police chief held a press conference after the encounter and even before the investigation was resumed, and before the FIR was sent to magistrates to try to influence the public, Grover said the SIT also did not conduct itself impartially and left out key evidence .
In light of the Commission’s report and the facts at issue, she emphasized the prosecution of the officers under the IPC and Section 302 of the Juvenile Justice Act. At the request of the attorney general, the court adjourned the case until January 23 to allow the state government to respond.
