MLA poaching case: SIT did not err in probe, state tells High Court

Lawyer representing state argues ‘unsustainable’ order for single judge to transfer investigation to CBI and revoke SIT

Hyderabad: Lawyers representing the state appealing the referral of the MLA poaching case argued in the High Court on Thursday that the special investigative unit, formed by the state government, had done nothing wrong in its investigation and that the single judge’s order to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation and revoke the SIT was ” unsustainable”.

A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Judge N Tukaramji heard the case from Supreme Court Senior Counsel Dushyant Dave representing the state of Telangana on Thursday and adjourned the case to Friday for further hearing.

The state has lodged an appeal challenging the single-judge order to hand over MLA poaching case investigations to the CBI. Dave said that while the jurisdiction of the writ court is broad, the scope of a single judge is narrow. He noted that leaks of evidence were seen as grounds for doubting the investigation. After the case was registered and evidence was presented to the court in the last week of October, the Chief Minister’s press conference was held on November 3, with Dave pointing out that once the material is presented to the court, it will become a public document.

As the Chief Minister of the country, it is his duty to make millions of voters see the undemocratic actions of the BJP to undermine and overthrow the government of Bharat Rashtra Samithi. Dave said the ruling party leader in one state cannot be expected to remain silent on the issue when the BJP has a record of destabilizing eight state governments. He said other chief ministers also held press conferences when the BJP was trying to destabilize their government, adding that the Telangana chief minister had reached out to the people of India through the media and there was nothing wrong with that.

Dave further argued that the courts do not have the power to dismiss the investigation. Moreover, only the BJP and the defendants sought referral for investigation. The SIT, made up of independent senior officials, did nothing wrong, yet the judges even went so far as to annul the SIT constitution without any complaints. Dave argued that cases could not be referred to the CBI without the state’s approval, and were known to be transferred for investigation only in rare cases.

SIT operates independently. He argued that the narrow approach of a single judge in referral of investigations, dismissal of the SIT and investigations based on evidence leaked by the chief minister was unsustainable, noting that through traps set by the police, attempts to sway the ruling party could be established. He said the reason for the referral was “unlawful”.

Gandra Mohan Rao, senior legal counsel representing the complainant, Pilot Rohit Reddy, said the complainant was threatened to join the BJP or face the Enforcement Bureau and the CBI. The ED is already behind him and now that the investigation is being transferred to the CBI raises serious concerns, he said, noting that the right to a fair investigation applies not only to the accused but also to the victims and complainants.

Senior counsel DV Seetharam Murthy, who is representing the three lead accused in the case, submitted a submission in support of the single judge’s order. He said the judge passed the order only after he was reasonably satisfied with concerns about an unfair investigation. The judge rightly exercised criminal jurisdiction in the writ petition by setting aside the investigative process, arguing that when such jurisdiction is exercised, the state can only appeal to the Supreme Court and not the High Court.